If you invest $1.00 at 5% and let it run for 50 years, it would have grown to $11.00+, without allowing for the erosion of your income, whether annually or after a period of years, several times, by income tax, or the ongoing erosion in value of your asset by inflation. If, however, you could invest it at 10%, after that same 50 year period it would have grown to $117.00+. Your investment could lose 3/4 of its value and still come out ahead of having invested it at 5%. Actually, more than that - for it's the value after taxes and inflation that really counts. Do you expect that companies like Exxon, Gillette, Coca Cola, and such, or other major petroleum, pipeline companies, etc. may go out of business? Or even suffer serious losses. A person who invests a major portion of his (probably less likely "her", cause women generally are more risk-averse and less likely to plunge; [some would say, "smarter"]) total invested asset into highly speculative issues seems to me to have cheese for brains. The stock markets as a whole have average growth of 7 - 8% or so, over the long term. Few mutual fund managers' holdings have grown faster. And they charge fees for their expertise - somewhere between 1 - 2% in the U.S. for equity (i.e. stock market based) funds, most of them over 2% annually in Canada. If they match the long-term average growth of the market ... they're reaping about a fifth to a quarter of the growth, a larger proportion in Canada. Unfortunately, if there is no growth - they still get their percentage. Many persons calling themselves financial planners/advisors are actually mutual fund sales people: that's all the equity-related financial issues that they're licensed to sell. They don't want to talk to you about individual stocks, for they can't sell them and it's illegal for them to recommend them unless they've taken the courses that stockbrokers take (which few have - their courses are much less complex). There are a few who sell no financial products, but many of them stop doing that because often their income levels are much lower, despite many people who want to invest saying that they'd really love independent advice. One should investigate what kind of training a prospective personal financial advisor has taken and whether s/he has advanced courses above the minimum requirements. Also what kind and length of experience the prospective advisor has. Also what lifestle experience the prospect has: some have seen a great deal more of life than others - and have learned much more per year than many who have lived as many years. Finally - you need a person whose personality and ideas are compatible with yours. You will trust that person with a very important part of your life. Some years ago, when I had a display at a county fall fair, someone asked me what right I had to call myself a financial planner. I said that we could get rid of unemployment tomorrow - we need only have every unemployed person put out a shingle on his front lawn calling himself a financial planner, as it was unregulated - any darn fool could do it. Stock brokers were regulated, as were mutual fund salespeople, but in our area at that time financial planners were not, as there were few of them operating outside of stockbrokerage and mutual fund sales agencies. That's not the case now - but it would be a good idea to ask several of them what kind of regulations there are governing them. I took the course that stockbrokers take, over 20 years ago and worked for a mutual fund sales brokerage (i.e. they could offer mutual funds managed by a large number of managers, rather than only funds managed by their own company). I didn't produce enough sales to suit them, so was there for only one year. I'm more tuned into the idea of helping people set their financial goals, look at some concepts that they might not have thought of, and work toward achieving them. I am totally devoted to helping my clients decide what they want to achieve and start out on a plan of how to achieve that/those goals. They don't have to be concerned that my advice or recommendations may be slanted toward various financial products that I just happen to sell, for I don't sell any. One local person that I met a few years ago said that he'd done well in business and managing his investments, so some friends asked him to manage some money for them. He asked for a minimum investment of $10,000., asked the client to sign a power of attorney for that account only, and when he made decisions about investments, a copy of the confirmation went to the client and one to him. He charged 10% of the growth (exclusive of dividends, if I remember correctly). Rather a good idea, for if he doesn't produce, he doesn't get paid. There is a fairly major proviso, though - that he might choose some fairly risky investments where there could well be a possibility of major gain. He being a person of integrity, I think that he was quite strongly guided by the level of risk that his clients were willing to tolerate. When I asked what happened if there were no gain - he said that there hadn't been a year yet that he hadn't been able to send a request for payment to every client. I'm not sure how many years the concept had been in operation. This has been rather off topic - sorry about that. As for many people lacking time to manage their investments ... ... many people spend more time on consideration of where they'll go for a two week vacation than they do on an investment system that may well be in place for forty years (or more). Good wishes for making your money work well for you - rather than better for someone else. joyful guy

Hi again, everyone, Update on the above info, offered by my friend the accountant whom I first met at the investment group about 5 years or more ago. The guy who retired last year, without a pension, and who now borrows at about 6% (interest deductible when used for investment) and puts it out to earn about 12% (much of current return at low tax rate, some of it deferred, to be taxed at low rate when withdrawn). He says that the amount of current income that that can be obtained free of tax is closer to $50,000.00. Same provisos as outlined above - with possibility of bumping up the amount that is received free of tax given some of the situations as mentioned. Sorry that the situation applies only to Canadian residents, folks. Good wishes to you and yours. ole joyful P.S. We had a visitor/new member at our investment group last week, who said that she felt rather at sea, among such skilled investors. We told her not to feel bad - that in the investment game, there are no stupid questions. That she should ask any of us to explain various terms or situations that were unfamiliar to her. Each of us learns as we go, a step at a time. Compensation usually increases commensurate with increased knowledge! o j

The pictures above are lovely. I'll add one that is a little different (because I don't have a collection of interesting animals). The folks who owned this cabin displayed a light in each front window during the Iraq War until their soldiers came home. Unfortunately, the US flag is displayed backward. The blue field should be on the flag's right which is the viewer's left, but let's not let that get in the way of message.

Hi all, Income tax season was over April 30 - so it's time to get this message started down th list ... ... on its way to oblivion. Which takes a lot longer on this slow-moving (slow-thinking?) place than on KT, etc. Have a great weekend, all. ole joyful