The increasing prices have impacted my plan to retire at 62, work part-time, and save for the future. I'm concerned about whether those who navigated the 2008 financial crisis had an easier time than I am currently experiencing. The combination of stock market volatility and a decrease in income is causing anxiety about whether I'll have sufficient funds for retirement.

This is precisely why I like having a portfolio coach guide my day-to-day market decisions: with their extensive knowledge of going long and short at the same time, using risk for its asymmetrical upside and laying it off as a hedge against the inevitable downward turns, their skillset makes it nearly impossible for them to underperform. I've been utilizing a portfolio coach for more than two years, and I've made over $800,000

Mind if I ask you to recommend this particular coach you using their service?

Annette Marie Holt has always been on the top of my list..She is regarded as a genius in her area and well knowledgeable about financial markets. I highly recommend her

I just looked her up on the web and I would say she really has an impressive background in investing. I will write her an email shortly.

Horrific management!!!

100%!

The Boss is way out of line >__< What he should do was to have a debat on this

He literally wrote in “entreleadership” to never scold your employees in public

Dave probably should have just remained calm and told the caller that he'll ask George about that video and see what George actually said. I'd like to think George is smarter than to put out misinformation. Hope that meeting between Dave and George WAS cool headed and gave George the benefit of the doubt. Not good for Dave to jump to conclusions without letting George explain. George is a good guy.

This is also how I understood it.

Yeah, and that’s a hidden upside to FIRE: while that first decade is crucial to your long-term success, if you retired at 30 you can return to work and course-correct. Trying Dave’s strategy at 60 and having a bad first decade in the market means you’re screwed.

It's a situation no sane person would ever consider.

If you retire at 30 you would NEED to course correct. There's no way that can work. Even retiring at 60 is questionable. Generally people shouldn't retire before the age of 80.@@epbrown01

Retiring at 35 is so different than retiring at 65. The caller is misunderstood and Ramsay didn’t realize it was based on low retirement savings at 35 years old

Idk, why you're saying public humiliation. It would only be humiliating if that is actually what happened, but it's not. The video from George is still up so it's obvious Dave doesn't disagree with it. It is also obvious the caller did not understand the context of George's video as the video is literally called Why retiring at 35 is a bad idea. So there's obviously more context to George's vid than "The Power of Zero" is providing. You guys just want there to be drama in everything.

@@BosuDX The reaction Dave had was one that presumed George had made a critical error. It didn't give him the benefit of the doubt. If you heard that your friend said something that surprised you and you disagreed with, would you jump to anger like that or would you say something like. "I don't know the context, but I expect you may have misunderstood what my friend was saying."

@@BosuDX While George was right in the end, it doesn't take from the fact that Dave got insenced and basically called him a dumdum. You can be humiliated even when you're right.

Yes, I completely agree. And this is why I now believe Dave Ramsey is too big for his britches. Because he has so much experience and knows so much, he gets upset when people don’t. he no longer has the heart of a teacher

He's a asshole. We lease our truck cause it makes us money and he said it was stupid and the most expensive way to own a car. After 39 months of just oil changes and tire rotations we turned it back in no negative equity. My Cruze I own and have already dumped 4000 in it to keep it paid off when that 4000 could have been another lease with a reliable car. After 6 years the cars value is worth nothing and you have more into it then it's worth. @@uria711

Exactly

Exactly. And the fact that everybody is ragging on Dave is crazy.

Plus Dave was too arrogant to hold off and look into all of the facts. He thinks he's all-knowing, and as often happens, has egg on his face and looks like an out of control egomaniac. George needs to get out and spin off his own thing, just like AO. I'd hate to be Dave's daughter and basically "stuck" working for Dave or she is cut out of both her job/reputation and all of company assets she is set to inherit.

Dave will fucking loathe the FIRE movement. He won’t countenance it.

correct. he did NOT give dave the full picture. hence the blow up from dave. this was probably brought up, and george told him "watch the video." then saw what he ACTUALLY was talking about.

The minute my boss calls me 'stupid' on-air, I'm telling him to go f himself and getting up out of there. George doesn't need that.

She didn’t push back enough.

This video is pretty ingenious, George was specifically referring to people who want to retire in their thirties, not this gentleman who is working until his normal retirement date.

@@TheFattestDad No, he specifically addressed that fact. George clearly stats using a 4% withdraw rate, you would have 3% of your retirement left after 30 years which is the standard retirement calculation. It is also shown clearly in the chart. How about you start learning math and stop simping for Dave Ramsey.

@Cjamal66 Go simp for Dave Ramsey somewhere else. George clearly states you would have only 3% of your retirement left using the 4% rule. He also clearly shows that using 5%, you have only 17% left after 20 years and its gone at 25 years. I would say that is pretty clearly agreeing with the 4% rule.

I find him to be extremely condescending.

@joemunch58 truth hurts. People need to stop letting their feelings get in the way of the message and doing what they’re supposed to do

Well, he did brand a weapon to staff once. They run the company like a cult. One time a staff member became pregnant, so he fired her for not being married and going against Christianity.

Yes, Google for the employment lawsuits.

Their livelihood is on the line. She's set for life regardless of checking him or not.

She's the ONLY who can get away with it

​@azteca6695 yeah, she will always be daddy's lil girl.

But did she REALLY stand up to him on this though? It was just a very soft ball pushback.

What he gone do, fire his daughter?

@@FURDOG1961well he is half of Dave’s age….

​@FURDOG1961 the more I watch Dave...the less I believe his numbers.. wouldn't surprise me if its all smoke and mirrors.

@@dirtdevil70I think he has a ton of real estate and most of it double or tripled through the last 5 years.

@Bibleguy89-uu3nr yep...he's out of touch with regular people...

@@FURDOG1961 Dave has the advantage of time. George has done it without being an idiot in his early years.

He does account for market declines. That’s why he says 12% average. He doesn’t recommend people have a withdrawal rate of 29% just because it returns 33% some years. He says it averages 12 so you can withdraw 8. Over a 15 year period, your account balances will not go down. Over a 3 year period, it might go down.

Correct ​@@wadelevan1787

@@wadelevan1787and 12 is a lot Historically isn’t it closer to 8?

Yes, he does. An average of 12% is the compound average. That means over 100 years, the average value of the market is (1+12%)^100, which is 85,522 times growth. Or, put another way, if the market is 85,522 times larger after 100 years, the average rate of return, INCLUDING crashes and down years is e^(log(85,522)/100)-1, or 12%.

Yes, but if the market declines 20% at the time of a needed withdrawal (i.e. an RMD), you’re not only having to withdraw a larger % that you budgeted, you have to have a much higher % return to catch up. So timing and risk is critical. Some may not have the ability to ride out the decline and rebound.

lol exactly

I've often gotten cringe sores while listening to Dave's radio show, when he scolds this person or that, calling them stupid, or insinuating they're corrupt, without fully considering the entirety of any given situation. And even though I often feel like loud-mouth-know-it-alls have it coming when they parade over their egos, I still can't help to just feel sorry and pain for Dave and his family when I hear these types of clips.

@@Rick-the-SwiftI was thinking the same. You can see Rachel’s pain. This was a low stakes situation… Dave had a tantrum over what seems to be nothing. I think he was just mad George went off and had his own opinion. Dave DESPERATELY needs yes-men around him for whatever reason. And when he doesn’t get that… he unravels with misdirected rage and it’s embarrassing to watch. Rachel has to choose between dignity or inheritance…

Yeah and notice how none of them mention that all they do is parrott what ever dave says .

Exactly people are not taking into account a lost decade. Also if you can live on 3-4% that’s amazing as long as your living life to the fullest just invest the other 7%

@@Dividendsmattertooand in boom decade ppl can live off 16% withdrawal rates. 😂

​@@Dividendsmattertoomy index funds ain't nothing since biden took office😅😅😅😅

Plus if withdrawal over 25k.You got pay taxes on ssi benefits.34K IF MARRIED.

He does has his own youtube channel, you can support that by subscribing!

This! This comment! I was going to say the same thing! Seems like one big misunderstanding and Dave didn’t take a step back to verify the claim and just went off. Man I feel for George, I probably would quit. Dave embarrassed the crap out of George in front of millions. I love George!

@@bhilde55 nah. Dave embarrassed himself. George is right and anyone with a single brain cell can see it.

@@bhilde55 Me too! George gives great information in his videos and always adds a little humor to each. Love them.

Honestly I think you're right, I wonder what sadness response to is this

But man Dave should look back on this and feel embarrassed

I think you meant Anthony O'Neal lol

@@aceflamez00 They all look the same to him. ;)

@@gingercat7925😂

Why did O’Neal leave ?

Anthony wasn't thrown under the bus.He went out to create something that was his vision.I believe they parted on good terms.

lol, at 9:09 he called him a "4% withdrawal moron"! 😂

Not logically, anyway.

It wouldn't surprise me. If my boss verbally berated me in front of the whole world to see and hear for really no reason I think I would take a long hard look at things going forward especially if their was a ongoing pattern. George may be the next one to jump that ship.

You wouldn't pay taxes if it's coming out of a Roth IRA or 401k after age 59.5. But that wouldn't apply to those on FIRE as George was discussing

There's a lot wrong with his math here; no one can sustain a 12% return year after year. An 8% withdrawal post market downturn could be catastrophic for a retirement portfolio. He's also assuming everyone has other income streams aside from their retirement withdrawals, which they don't.

@@aj_mcnamara you pay taxes on 401k withdrawals, it's just taxed as income. So if you're withdrawing 50k/year, you're basically paying 0 tax, but if you're withdrawing 150k/year, a huge chunk of that is going to tax.

@@aj_mcnamara Umm yes you pay taxes on 401k withdrawals unless it’s a Roth 401k, which almost nobody has

@@mish4181 last year’s S&P return was 24%, not sure where you got 8% from

Agreed. Rachel is trying to tow the Company line, but she's too smart for this. As a Dad what shitty situation he put her in.

Ditto, he sounds like a raging narcissist. Scarry thought WWJD Dave?

Not saying you’re wrong overall, but they’re called Ramsey personalities because they work for Ramsey Solutions. And they’re not gonna be allowed to deviate from Dave on air.

People lack common sense. He built his company on principals a, b, and c… his employees shouldn’t go on air under his $$ and say do x, y, z. If they want to do that then venture out on your own and build your own company. If he is wrong or not on the %.. save and invest and stop wasting money and you will be fine. If you are smart enough to save and invest I’m confident you will figure out how much you should personally withdraw.

He is such a rude narcissist. So terrible to carry on like that about his employee. I’d take George’s advice over him.

That reminds me of when I read The Millionaire Next Door when I was broke after leaving my teaching job. Reading that book didn't do a damn thing for me. It's not the great resource that people think it is, especially compared to books like Automatic Millionaire or The Total Money makeover.

Dave will freely admit his advice doesn't help people below a certain income level. I haven't listened to him in a few years but he used to phrase it in terms of needing to make around 4x the minimum wage in your area before his strategies were viable. At anything below that, you just don't have the income and expenses against that income to really make significant lifestyle changes. And instead you should be focused on making more money, either through taking on debt to invest in yourself (yes, he would promote debt for this), or through working additional jobs. In current terms, if minimum wage in your area is $15/hour, it would mean you need at least $120k/year in income (single, not married) before his advice is meant to apply to you.

​@@phonyalias7574 I don't think that's quite accurate. I make $50K, and I make enough to put his debt snowball into practice. Once that ball gets rolling, it will free up $650/month, over $7500 a year, which can then be used for saving and investing. I make about double the median income in my city, not 4x.

He’s definitely outgrowing him

He can probably go off on his own at this point. He has enough people following him specifically by this point. I've always liked him on the show and on his own videos. He seems like a voice of reason most of the time.

George is already millionaire and Dave is ready to sack him

@@davidc4408Once you start pushing back on the big dog, there's a good chance you're gone. Dave does nothing but surround himself with yes-men.

@@jgallone yep. They did it with chris Hogan. Nobody is safe unless blood related.

He does: kzfaq.info/love/NIFV-Bgh2YtrWQxmrgFS4w

Just like others who have left Dave's show.

I'd watch

@@sagatuppercut2960Who are the others that left? I want to see their videos lol

Watch Anthony O'Neal " The Table"​@@Hunter-ef4ch

Dave is so full of himself. His ego is ridiculous. Telling people that 8% drawdown in retirement is OK is a huge diservice, as it puts them on the bleeding edge of hoping their investments perform each and every year at a high rate, and requires you to go all stocks at a later age to achieve these numbers instead of a prudent mix of stocks and 5% treasuries to hedge. Very few financial folks out there will recommend 8% withdrawals.

@@993mikeHe even conceded to Rachel saying be more conservative at 10% and subtract 4% and that’s 6%. Four to five percent is just a tad more conservative than 6%.

He's also quite wrong with his oversimplified math and assumptions.

@@AlanPeeryhe’s predicting a very rosy picture into the future with no volatility

Everyone is ignoring the fact that Georges video was talking about what's wrong with the early retire at 30 scenario. one being you can only draw a measly 4% if it gonna last 60 plus years. the caller did not state that and Dave did not know that was what Kamels video was about. Dave was thinking the guy was planning to work another 30 years and could only live on 4%.

@@Remo22Mod Still doesn’t justify Dave’s poor reaction.

He's fired employees before for having sex outside of wedlock.

The other issue is some years are down years, meaning when you withdraw you’re losing principal. That’s where the far lower safe withdrawal rate comes from. I 1000% trust the studies done by experts over one man’s opinion.

@@traceswann7054 Yeah its called "sequence of returns risk" and Dave completely - and I mean TOTALLY gets this 100% wrong - the market isnt linear - never has been never will be

​@@traceswann7054I would argue that that 1 man is an expert who has done multiple studies.

​@@traceswann7054You don't need studies done by experts just look at the lifetime avg rate of return for the S&P 500.

On avg I have made 13.8% over the last 26 years a few years down but mostly up and still came out at 13.8 compounded each year. I don't see Dave's numbers being that far off at all.

This is the best comment on here. The amount of people who missed it is surprising.

Maybe you're just weak

He’s very hypocritical. He kept that guy working who was cheating on his wife and fired a female employee that got pregnant out of wedlock. She took him to court and they ended up firing whatever that guy’s name was that supposedly wrote the millionaire book. Which sucked by the way.

@@Mk-qb2ny Actually that is %100 true and a good thing. But he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me. 10That is why, for Christ's sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong. 2 Corinthians 12: 9, 10

REALLY? NOT NICE @@Mk-qb2ny

​@@Mk-qb2nylol

They probably know how spiteful he is.

Plus if withdrawal over 25k.You got pay taxes on ssi benefits.34K IF MARRIED.

Let's be honest, there is no correcting Dave. We know that. They know that. So definitely not going to go back and forth on air.

For 46 out of the last 48 years, if you had retired and withdrew 8% a year, your money would have lasted 30 years. Go look it up. DR is actually right on this one. Heck, T-bills are currently paying over 5%, so unless you think the US government is going to default on its debt, then you can get AT LEAST that much of a return! Sheesh

@@jasonbroom7147 Sure you can always take out 8%. You can withdraw 8% of $1000 portfolio. Dave specifically said that you could take out $80k/year on a $1M portfolio. Try that, and you only are successful 36% of the time for varying 30 year periods over the last 123 years.

Yea, I thought it was click bait too.

7:39

@@RustyZipper Just realized I am the same age as David Ramsey. No jealousy here, I don't have his money but I live in a quiet village in Northeastern Brazil with my wife of 25 years in a very comfortable home watching these shows. 😎

@@RoddieSimmons - that’s fantastic 👏 I’m a bit older that George and certainly not a millionaire. But I’m debt free and work two jobs. I just came back from a two day trip with my g/f and spent around $850 all in. It made no impact on my finances. All of the meals we ate were in nice places. Now I order off menu’s reading left to right, I try to ignore the right hand column as Dave recommends. I always reassure my g/f when we look at the menu to “order anything you want, it makes no difference” 🍻

Being completely honest S&P has only ave 12% return since 1945 Between 1901 and 1944 the ave was less than 1%

If you assume retirement at 67+, which is probably more in line with old fashioned Dave's thinking, it's not too crazy. An average person retiring at 67 is far more likely to run out of life before they run out of money with an 8% withdrawal rate. But for an early FIRE-style 30+ year retirement, the context of George's video, Dave is absolutely wrong.

@@ordinaryhuman5645 can you be more specific? If you’ve already made it to 67 when is your average age of death? And can you qualify “far more likely?” That’s a big term.

​@@financesage the CDC estimates average age of death to be around 76 years old after the covid outbreak but for countries comparable to the US its estimated around 82. So if these numbers are consistent the average person could expect retirement to last around 9-15 years before death if they retire at 67. I think that's what the other comment was getting at as someone who building towards FIRE would need their money to last 2.5-5x as long.

He’s a product of his privilege. Born into upper middle class with parents that got him set up in real estate at 18 and know real estate investors for young master Dave to pitch to. bankers that gave him notes that he should’ve never got. His whole story is only possible because of his privilege. And that’s fine! But it’s not OK to try to white wash it or pretend it wasn’t privilege that most of us never, ever see.

Nuance is the name of the game here.

Plus if withdrawal over 25k.You got pay taxes on ssi benefits.34K IF MARRIED.

@@MrDonny27 Gees, how many times are you going to make the same quote in one thread? You are starting to act like a bot.

It must be a bot.

Seems like a professing Christian (Ramsey) would be able to see the serious error of getting so worked up about money that he goes off on a rant about taking away people's hope (money). Tell me you serve money without telling me you serve money.

"Powdered butt syndrome"! I have heard Dave say that many times. It is so true. He's not going ever follow what his daughter says.

Well that’s not gonna go over well next team meeting…dust off that resume

8 % isn't reasonable. Money guy even agrees with George. Dave isn't always right

@@laundrygoddess4Yeah, but the money guy doesn’t drink beer.

@@tonycrabtree3416 so?

On one of Dave's show I heard him talk about how he would be "Preaching" at a Church he would be visiting over the weekend. I can only imagine what kind of Church would be letting Dave Ramsey "Preach" on Sunday morning.

His pride as a Christian? What's that got to do with anything?

Dave is claiming that he’s Christian…. A christian should not have pride like him !!

@@Rome1017Lights - Dave's prideful and that is one of the seven deadly sins. Dave has to get a handle on this and his temper.. You can't change what you don't acknowledge..

Effective personal finance management is more significant than the amount of money saved, independent of income source (work or investment). To optimize financial outcomes, individuals might seek help from a professional financial advisor, who can provide specialized advice and strategies to reduce expenses and maximize revenue.

@@ericwilde4583 I completely agree; I am 60 years old, recently retired, and have approximately $1,250,000 in external retirement funds. I am debt free and have very little money in retirement funds compared to the total value of my portfolio over the past three years. To be honest, the Fin-advisor can only be neglected, not rejected. Just do your due diligence to identify a fiduciary one.

@@JosephineGaule This is exactly how i wish to get my finances coordinated ahead or retirement. Can I get access to your advisor?

Do your due diligence and opt for one that has tactics to help your portfolio continue consistent and steady growth. “Emily Lois Parker” is accountable for the success of my portfolio, and I believe she has the qualifications and expertise to accomplish your objectives.

@@JosephineGaule This is useful information; I copied her full name and pasted it into my browser; her website popped up immediately and her qualifications are excellent; thanks for sharing.

How much was the S&P500 down in 2022?

Actually the S&P was up in 2021, it was down in 2022

Fact my been flat since biden took office

@simonlaw276 "I love how he cherry picks that the S&P is up 10% YTD and fails to mention that it was -10% in 2021" Not arguing with you. I agree that Dave avoids mentioning losing years in the market. Just want to clarify that the S&P was UP 26.6% in 2021, NOT down ~10%. I think you meant 2022. 2022 was DOWN ~20%.

No, he mentioned the rate of return averages over a decade in the video. It doesn't matter what it did last year...

I agree. I do not agree with his political or religious views but I do like his principles of getting out of debt and saving.

100%

Nah, you're completely wrong. The creator of this video is misleading, I'll be gracious and assume from ignorance, not from intention. Here's what Dave really says: 1) You can AVERAGE a 12% return over the LIFETIME of your investments. In my 10 years of following Dave's investment advice, he's spot on. I'm currently at a 11% return and expect it to AVERAGE closer to 12% in the year or two. 2) George Kamel was describing (and CRITICIZING) the FIRE investment plan and pointing out its flaws. He WAS NOT endorsing it!

@@java_debugger You're wrong. You can't stay there in retirement, or your portfolio is gonna get decimated when the market is down and you won't be able to recover in a timely manner. Sure, go all out when you're accumulating and won't touch the funds for years to come, but retirees can't be 100% stock-invested with no volatility buffer. Anyone who tells you otherwise either doesn't know what they're talking about or doesn't want you to. Now, to the 8% withdrawal rate -- this is an absurd recommendation. He simply doesn't understand the math, nor does he understand the various risks in retirement such as sequence of return, inflation, and spending shocks, and following his advice is likely to get adherents into trouble as they try to implement it.

​@@maliqmatthew1009Not if you invest the way he suggests; it goes down with the market, not decimated. Biggest drop I saw in my 401k was the spring of 2020; it dropped 30%. And guess what? At the end of year, it recovered and I had a 4% gain! Statistically, by the way, if you contribute something like 5% of your income (Dave recommends 15%) combined with an employer match, for 30-40 years, you WILL have multiple millions in your 401k.

@hernanecomh - I agree -- and Dave should DEFINITELY PUBLICLY apologize, saying he misunderstood that George was talking about retiring at a different point in life.

I don't listen to Dave ramsey. He is very arrogant and loud and thinks that he is Gods gift to the Universe!!!

YEP

The caller was asking about coast-FI and “coasting” from his current $120k to what he will need for his retirement number at retirement age. It’s definitely better to be on the conservative side if you plan to coast-FI

@@nodsib Sorry, I don't know what coast-FI means.

​@@Columbus1152Coast-FI means that you've saved enough that you will be able to reach FI by your target, without contributing any more money (hence, "coasting"). For example, if their FI number was $1M, and they are planning on retiring in 30 years, then that's doable with just the $120k they have now, growing at an 8% annual return. It's obviously super dependent on what returns to expect, and how far out retirement is, so I would generally recommend anyone who wants to coast-fire to use conservative return estimates. It's better to save a little bit extra just in case

Now you are retired and depend on your investment, it’s best you redistribute your capital. To simplify the process, you could allocate your resources with the help of a financial advisor.

I needed a good boost to help my dwindling stock portfolio stay afloat, hence I and came across an expert who helped a lot to grow my port-folio from $275k to approx. $850k in two years.

This is really nice. I worry that I have a couple more years before retirement, and I want to switch to using a financial advisor, I could really use the expertise of this advsors.

My financial advisor is *Sharon Louise Count* I found her on a CNBC interview where she was featured and I reached out to her afterwards via her website

I just googled her name and I'm really impressed with her credentials; I reached out to her since I need all the assistance I can get. I just scheduled a call.

His tone is harsh

65 is too young. Retiring at 30 is absolutely CRAZY.

lol

You can’t say it’s stupid or wrong if it works, you may disagree with it, just like you can’t tell someone who’s been married for 50 years that there marriage advice is wrong and you’ve only been married for 5.

been drawing 3% first half of year from emerging growth, large cap, small cap funds ,, bumped it to 5 a few months ago .. as of now the total funds have 14% growth including my draws .. year before it was a 3% draw while they all sank

Ppl need to think for themselves. 12% returns every single year is unrealistic and so is withdrawing 8% out every single year.

I wish I knew, but I can strike that off my bucket list.

Yes, who does that?

But this proves one thing sir . AO made the right choice . George can do the same and have his own channel like AO did .

Dave clearly is not factoring in the sequence of returns risk that’s present. If you are fortunate enough to retire during the “right” time period, then you don’t have to worry about running out of money. However, if you do retire during a period of high inflation and low investment returns, and you’re taking out 8% a year, you will run out of money. For someone that purports to be a professional financial advisor, this is just plain stupid of Dave Ramsey to give such idiotic advice.

@@stephenrice5938 100% agree

@@muradshawar who is AO? I’m new watching these channels. Thanks

Dave ignores whatever is convenient to ignore.

Precisely: Dave should have said that he'd review that episode, and then re-iterate whatever he wants to say without bad mouthing George. Very unprofessional of Dave.

@@jroysdon it’s disappointing because George is one the best Ramsey personalities !

@@theentrepreneur607 Yes George is the best personality! I thinkJade is giving him a run for his money though 😀 Of course it's impossible to NOT like Rachel!

Right, something seems amiss here.

I would turn in my resignation letter.

Doesn't sound like that would matter to Dave based on his response.

@@jake-mv5oioh yeah, Dave is all in on 8% at retirement age. I was more so just saying the caller misinterpreted George's info.

8% still only has about a 30% chance of success if you are talking a typical 30 year retirement.

I personally don’t think Dave will ever admit a mistake. Trump syndrome.

I didn’t miss understand. When I called, I specifically mentioned that George’s point was about a 30 year time horizon.

FACTS you see the lawsuit that Daves company is dealing with 150 mill lawsuit from false mutual fund pushing

​@@Josh-py9rqit's America anyone can sue anyone. Just because someone is sued doesn't mean they're guilty by default.

​@@Josh-py9rqI don't see any record of a lawsuit about mutual funds, and Ramsey doesn't recommend any specific mutual funds so I don't see how that would make any sense.

@@funtechu I thought the lawsuit was over the timeshare exit company.

@@lovethemflowers There is a lawsuit over that, but that's completely different from what OP is referring to. I don't know if OP made it up, or if they are referring to some other lawsuit.

i guess Dave missed the whole great depression thing where it took 23-24 years to BREAK EVEN - 1929 to 1953 or 54 - look it up, its a FACT

My kids' 529s did 12% this past year

I imagine what Dave would say to that is that there will be years in your retirement that it loses or goes down, but it will eventually go back up and will correct itself during the duration of your retirement.

Dave is amazing at helping people get out of debt, but his investment strategies are simplistic and naive. Everyone doesn’t have a 100 million dollar income.

@@1981lashlarueyep, that is probably what he’d say. But he also would never say that if you lose 50% one year, you’d have to gain 100% the next year, just to get back to even. Think about it. I know the 50% example is absurd, but it illustrates the point. The sequence is critical. Dave ignores that.

@@danamarie8718 You're right. Losing 50% would be extreme but possible. However, unless you are at the very end of retirement or your funds are so low that you'd need that extra time to recoup them, most could afford to wait to the few years for it to go back up again. Ramsey doesn't believe in reducing the amount of your portfolio from stocks to bonds as you get older. Personally, I think that's the safe bet and is what I plan to do as I get older-- start moving a little more towards bonds than stocks. I started late so I have some catching up to do so I'm heavily on stocks for now.

@@1981lashlarue Except that this is exactly what a sequence of return risk refers to. NO, it will NOT go back up if the funds need to be withdrawn in the meantime. If someone had $1,000,000 in a retirement account and the market dropped 20%, they'd need a 25% recovery just to get back to where they were. If they're in retirement and distributing rather than accumulating, those dollars are gone forever, with holdings having been sold at a loss and not coming back to catch the new recovery and no new dollars coming to replace.

How is it going do you trade yourself and what do you think is the best approach for someone who is just starting out?

Herman Jonas is the brain behind my success. I've gotten into a plethora of assets with $63k spread across stocks (options and futures) for the short term and Roth IRA, index funds, and ETFs, for the long term. Now I sit back, and just reinvest at intervals while I handle my other businesses.

Do not forget that when it comes to the stock market, prices can be erratic, rising and declining quickly, often in relation to companies' policies, which individual investors do not influence.

How can I reach him, please? I've seen good recommendations of his work elsewhere. I need help with investing in stocks. I'm ready to pay for his services.

I appreciate the feedback. I reached out to him via the mail you provided and we talked at length. I found him to be verified. I’m glad that I signed up and I've begun my journey with him. Thanks again.

So last year it was negative, add to that inflation. Does that mean you live in a cardboard box that year?

Anybody who smugly guarantees 12% a year returns is a charlatan.

@@n1chr0me6 I do think it means you have to cut back during down years. Let's say you have two million dollars saved. If it goes down by 10% in one year, you're now down to $1.8M. If you spend $100k that year for living expenses, you're now down to $1.7M. Even if you go back up by 10% the following year, you're still only at 1.87M! Never mind the inflation and the stress.

@@jaehwan123 lol you sir, might be an idiot.

@@mikeshepherd9197 He live in a time where you could succeed with one parent working factory job, he's very out touch on how market works today. My advice is to use the 4% rule if it works for you and if you made 12% give you self a bonus at the end of the year by taking 2% what you made and do something fun. If your you need more to afford to live try 6% it seem to risky to go for 8% but I understand if you need too also because bills can be expensive if your nest egg is smaller than the average.

Yeah the endless credit creation that started in the 70s caused insane gains