Advice from Annuity Experts

[0b1kanobee]

In the real world, when you take away all the smoke and mirrors, people trade things other people can use for things they can use. In 2010, we trade paper for things of value. This is because the paper has a perceived value. The paper isn't actually worth anything beyond what the market says it's worth. We accept it as payment only because we know we can turn around and use it as payment.
Perception of value is very important in modern society. In fact, perception is everything. We've gone as far as creating electronic currency, where physical items are given in exchange for virtual items. This is only possible because of perception.
Gold is valuable for the same reasons paper money is valuable. Because gold cannot be used for anything (other than looking pretty), all of it's value is perceived value. We gave it value, therefore it has value. This is the underlying problem and the reason why gold, like paper money, is truly worth nothing.

A dollar invested in the stock market in 1801 would be worth 8.8 million dollars today.
A dollar invested in bonds in 1801 would be worth $14,000 today.
A dollar invested in gold in 1801 would be worth about $15 today.

If the market crashes, we're all going to be living in poverty. Why would we want gold?
I want you to think back to Hurricane Katrina. New Orleans was turned into a helpless swamp. There was no government, no effective police force, and no order. Did those people suddenly start trading gold? Of course not. They traded water, food, clothing, and other items of USE. If the world goes to hell, usefulness becomes valuable. Gold is not useful.

It is extremely heavy to as was mentioned LOL

 

[padthaiforlunch]

And here we have.... a little gold in this thread.

As someone who focuses on this age, I can tell you that there is a growing segment of agents who are selling less to seniors and more to pre-retirement people.

Seniors have that $50,000 IRA, but folks in their 50's seem to have that $100,000 IRA. In my experience.

In years past, the 50's crowd was not considered a candidate for what we do, because their money was tied up in employer based plans. Increasingly, agents are talking about inserting non-harship in-service withdrawals provisions into group retirement plans that change that whole dimension.

 

[HarryRenard]

And here we have.... a little gold in this thread.

The average age of my customers has gone down over the past past 12 months as more pre-retirees are open to annuities.

But having said that 'Non hard ship withdraws" can be great if you can get to the money which isn't always possible ( I find more times than not it isn't), so I still prefer my retirees even though their account are smaller.

 

[bluemarlin08]

The annuities with income riders, IMO, are lots of smoke and mirrors. You get the prospect drooling with these 8% guarantees in the income account (really a phantom account) and then pay them out a lot less than immediate annuity would pay out. IMO a total scam.

 

[HarryRenard]

Im not the biggest fan but i would say that I'd rather have a phantom account then a Spia and loose control of my principal.

By the way, how much more would a spia pay then an income account?