I have no problem with folks disagreeing. That's healthy. I am hurt that my friend Dave said mean things about my friend George Kamel in the public forum. It will make George even more beloved by the public. Folks enjoy standing up for the underdog, for sure!
I watched the same episode and was appalled at how poorly he treated George, who actually researched the math and is clearly more in-touch with the current financial world as a common person. Dave is worth half a billion and does not live in the same world as you and I do.
@@jasonmoquinGeorge research? Have you seen his take on cash value life insurance? He states misconception after misconception. Dave landed it right on the head. Just wrong subject.
@@Bryan-om3wq , I am not familiar with the topic you mentioned, his take on it, or whether you yourself having anything but passing knowledge about it to use as a framework of expertise. That aside, one topic is not another and I do have considerable experience in retirement planning and what one would consider reasonable distribution for portfolio longevity. George was spot on this time and his take is not only supported by massive amounts of research but is also in consensus with every single prominent financial advisor out there. You don’t have to defend Dave for getting it wrong here….and he absolutely is when that advice is being handed down to normal people without a half-billion- dollar asset portfolio. He’s a grown man, albeit a stubborn one, and is not right about everything.
I’m glad that Dave is finally getting exposed. He’s been touting this incorrect Math for years. What’s worse is how he threw his co-host George under the bus. Real Christian like there Dave 🙃.
I’m sure an 8% withdraw rate would work for a small percentage of people who are older and have plenty of money. But Dave saying that 8% is a rule of thumb is wildly irresponsible
The max year drop of the fund I'm looking at is 50% and has a return of 11.85 over 30 yrs, which in that dip, 8% IS 4% of the initial balance. Why is Dave wrong except being cocky 😅
I think 4-5% is definitely better. If there is a need for more or less some years, then so be it. But, the calculations need to be run. 8% may work for some people, but the problem is how Dave just flat-out would not entertain the discussion. I have listened to lots of Dave’s shows this past year. Some good tips, others not. With him, I have learned to be an open-book, do my own research, then make an educated decision. I think the majority of Dave’s listeners, given their mostly desperate situations, just take everything he says as truth with a one-size-fits-all approach.
The max year drop of the fund I'm looking at is 50% and has a return of 11.85 over 30 yrs, which in that dip, 8% IS 4% of the initial balance. Why is Dave wrong except being cocky 😅
A 60 something old lady called in a few months ago. She said that she was hospitalized for a period two years prior. When she got out of the hospital, she found out that she had been fired. 2 years later, she found out that she had medical bills in collections that she didn't that she knew about. She thought that she had been covered by her health insurance that she had while she was still working that job. Dave's response to this woman was: Duh, of course you weren't covered. I find him to be really tough to take sometimes. I use to cringe when he had that pod commercials where he called their competitors arrogant movers. Why are they arrogant Dave? Is it because they don't sponsor your company? I will listen, but he really is my least favorite. Sometimes, his nastiness has nothing to do with tough love.
@@amireallythatgrumpy6508 I need more than 1%, just to pay the taxes on my withdrawal! Wait! Did I just blow it with my provisional income? Somebody call IRMA! Why does financial life have to be so complicated? I think I put too much sugar on my bowl of Special 401K. I'm taking the standard reduction from now on.
i just want to know who in thier retirement would put 100% of their nest egg into mutual funds if you need to rely on the returns. So i think 12% is a bit optimistic for a retired person And if his 12% is always true, a person with a 3% mortgage would be smarter to take the extra money and invest it at 12% vs paying off the mortgage. I do like 90% of what he teaches, but nobody is right 100% of the time.
That is a great point! If you can truly count on 12% per year then the answer to his question "Would you take out a mortgage on your home to invest?" should be YES! Of course! You said I could count on 12%.
Nice interview. I have an MBA in finance and am a math nerd at age 76. My analysis shows 8% is a good number provided that withdrawal is partially put aside for those years where SPY drops. SPY is the best in my opinion and increased over 25% recently annually. Our rule is simple, we withdraw the annual increase in January and no more. And spend half of that over the year.
To me Dave Ramsey's primary mission has always been to make money from advertising and getting people to pay for his programs. he makes advertising money from having a large audience. entertainment not financial advise. He is not an RIA, nor is he a broker, but rather simply a radio talk show host. No one should be taking what he says as financial advise!
@11:30 Dave will never admit he is wrong on this. He has told a lot of already-retired people how much to save, where to invest and when to retire. Admitting he is wrong about this is admitting his advice will lead a significant number of them into a future of complete financial ruin, the complete opposite of what he promises. Why would anybody watch a finance show that has lead a significant number of people directly into relative poverty?
I’m approaching retirement and my portfolio has remained stagnant despite having solid companies in it. I'm willing to make huge investments if profits come in big leaps too, but are there any calculated money-making opportunities during a recession?
@@valentinaarrelaroTrue, despite setbacks and losses amid '20 pandemic crash, I was able to stay afloat and outperform, only cause I had an advisor overseeing my portfolio. As of today, I've accrued nearly $1m roi after 100s of thousands invested subsequently
@@chadgriffith1969I take guidance from Katherine Nance Dietz, you may have come across her before, she’s quite a sought-after advisor, extremely professional, highly knowledgeable, and very easy to work with.
@@M.Morgan your recommendation comes handy and well appreciated, curiously inputed her full name on my browser, and i'm super impressed with what i've seen so far... hoping to end the year effortlessly winning
Everyone but Dave knows that Dave is wrong... and honestly, I think he really knows, but is too stubborn/arrogant to change his stance on anything, just because he has said over & over he is "right". Saying anything else, would mean he was actually "wrong", and if he changes his mind on anything, that would mean anyone following his program can change their minds on the "steps". Personal finance isn't even a 100% right/wrong concept, so his thought process is flawed. Love his community and the debt free living concept and I appreciate his years on service to the public.
The max year drop of the fund I'm looking at is 50% and has a return of 11.85 over 30 yrs, which in that dip, 8% IS 4% of the initial balance. Why is Dave wrong except being cocky. Yes personal finance is nuanced but they agree on a level but no one see that, they just see, 'haha Dave is wrong' Haven't heard anyone address that mathematically it is sustainable as Dave said, but you cannot take a flat sum but a percentage if you work it like that.
Isn't the funny part that Dave always calls himself the nerd of the family? He likes the cred he gets from being a nerd, but all the other nerds are punching calculators in their Mom's basement. We used the baby steps to get out of debt and build up a bridge fund and nest egg that will allow us to retire earlier, so I'm grateful for that wisdom, but I've never really dialed into Dave's investment strategy. I could never find the combo of funds he claims to use that average 12-13% per year. He's off base here, but too far down the road to walk it back I guess.
The max year drop of the fund I'm looking at is 50% and has a return of 11.85 over 30 yrs (VUG), which in that dip, 8% IS 4% of the initial balance. Why is Dave wrong except being cocky 😅
Time for Dave to admit hes wrong. He has completely lost touch with the average person and its super dangerous for people with less than $25M in investments
@amireallythatgrumpy6508 lol dude if you think you can take 8% from your Retirement accounts and that you will get a 12% return in perpetuity then you deserve to lose it all I guess
The people have never had a clue. If you think withdrawing more than 1% of your retirement savings a year is a good idea, then you are dumber than a brick. If you even need to use your retirement savings t all, you have failed at life just like the other hundreds of millions of Americans. Like I say, you have never used your brain in your life. @@buckibanker
George needs to leave Ramsey Solutions and be on his own. He is a lot more entertaining and easier to listen to when not having to parrot Ramsey's archaic advise. He can preach basic principles of Ramsey without being so stubborn and condescending.
George and subject matter experts all agree- a 4% (or less) withdrawal rate is the safe and sound bet. Of course, if you have a business infotainment empire your milage may vary.
Dave is beyond arrogant and believes he knows all and everyone else is below him. I would never follow any of his advice purely for that reason alone. Too many other good, honest, and ACCURATE advisors out here to think that you'd need Daves advice.
Giving bad advice for retirement is a fiduciary duty. How a person can do this with no license shows his commitment to unethical behavior. We're in uncharted territory now. With Bidenomics in play, even having dollars is unpredictable at best. Are going to do things the same way as we did 20 to 40 years ago?
Thank you for stating this, Dave has been ignoring the unprecedented and severe negative economics from this current Administration, Congress and the Federal Reserve. While Dave’s advice has help so many get out of debt and achieve the first level of financial freedom, he needs to adjust his advice to the changing of the economic landscape, especially for retirement, it’s a fiduciary obligation to do so, because things are always changing and unfortunately for the worse on a macro and micro economic levels.
Why on Earth would anyone be so stupid? "Gee, my money is going down really fast, stock market is down pretty far, better keep withdrawing at the same rate Dave told me to". Wouldn't most people course correct?
I found Dave Ramsey as a young girl in debt anxiety. This was pre-personal computer days. I read an article in the financial times and adopted Dave’s Baby Steps. 30 years later I’m proud to report I’ve lived a debt free life, own a home and, have six figures in my 401k. Looking forward to a reassuring retirement. Just saying, Dave’s budget advice is spot on.
@@DavidMcKnightI don't love his debt advice. I can't get past how illogical it is to ignore interest rates and go by dollar amount of debts for payoff. That's just dumb.
Dave Ramsey has done a phenomenal job creating a generation of financially literate viewers. • I am able to respect his previous and ongoing contributions to financial literacy. BUT • I am using the 4% rule to plan my retirement. In 2023 the Internet has democratized access to financial literature. Everyone who has the initiative to work (earn a paycheck) should take the initiative to read and learn how much you need to save for retirement. Or how much you can withdraw from your retirement account. I am passionate about this and hope each of us plan for retirement just as we plan our lives.
Dave is good at one thing only, paying off debt. His other advice is problematic. Few people get 12 % every year, most people have more than sp500 investments, which means it could be much less than 12 % per year. You did not get 12 % this year in reits. I also don't agree that Dave does not recommend pre nups. So if you divorce, 60% do, you now pay for litigation lawyers.
The stock market has had (3) 10 year stretches during the last 100 years where the market showed a loss, 1930-1940, 1965-1975 & 2000-2010. If a retiree lived through just one of those periods while withdrawing 8% a year, he or she would be looking for a job.
It seems clear that when Dave Ramsey speaks of withdrawing 8% each year in retirement, he's not talking about withdrawing 8% in the first year and adjusting that dollar amount for inflation in subsequent years per the Bill Bengen approach. He is speaking of a fixed percentage withdrawal: withdrawing 8% the first year, 8% the second year, and so on. With this approach, he's mathematically correct--the portfolio can never be depleted. The result, however, is likely to be wildly variable year-to-year withdrawal amounts in terms of dollars.
Nope. He’s talking about 8% of the day 1 retirement balance. He’s fond of saying, if you have $1,000,000 in retirement your portfolio will lay 80,000 golden eggs every year. If you do this, however, your portfolio runs out about 2/3 of the time over a 30- year retirement.
No. Year one you get $80k. Year two you are compounding off of $920k, that is $73k and you take out $7k to make up for shortfall. It is a chain. A down year has you realize losses with less invested capital to recover.
Start with a buffer of 3-5 years. Draw from that. Put that buffer in a savings account earning 3%-4%. The rest you put in a stock portfolio. Just watch your portfolio. If you make say 15% on that withdraw and put it in your buffer. If you have a bad year, just live of your buffer. If you have a great year in your portfolio of say 25% then put some additional in your buffer to make up of for a bad year.
@@DavidMcKnight Yes, because from that buffer you live off. The rest can keep on growing. So if there is a bad year or even three bad years in your stock portfolio it doesn’t hurt you as you don’t need to withdraw from your portfolio - you still have the buffer. If you have a five year buffer you will be ok. The chances of having five bad years in a row in the stock market are very slim.
I use a CD ladder 3 year ladder every 6 months a CD is at maturity. If the market is down I use those funds if the market is up I withdraw from either my Roth or traditional IRA depending on taxes.my IRA and Roth are 100 % invested in stocks.
One thing about Dave that surprises me is that he invests in international funds being as they're not very attractive return wise (yeah yeah past performance doesn't predict future performance) since he preaches a consistent high percentage return one would think he would preach 100% U.S. funds
I am a HUGE Dave Ramsey fan. However, Dave Ramsey never addresses that , when the market drops over the course of a year, his formula means you can take $0 dollars out of your investments. The 3% rule allows for down market years…Ramsey’s does not.
Ramsey should have been angry, 3 % withdraw rate is bad advice. Most would feel they would never have the means to retire. So what are they projecting to keep all of your money in a checking account.
Sick of people using “basement dwelling incels” or some variation to denigrate people they disagree with. He didn’t say incel but that’s common to hear that tacked onto the basement dweller insult.
Dave Ramsey always shows his bully side any time someone verbalizes an argument that opposes his zealous ideology. You see this a lot from people with deeply rooted, religious backgrounds. Most of the time, you are better off to avoid these people altogether because they will never allow themselves to explore logic or reason. With these people, there is their doctrine and if you don’t like it; you are wrong.
No respect for those who tear down someone to get ahead in their own business. Smells like jealousy & makes you look bad. You don't have to agree with your competition, neither do you have to try to destroy your competition. Just do your thing & leave everyone else out of it. That makes you look like a good person.
Not tearing down. Just challenging worldviews in an attempt to advance dialogue aground sustainable planning principles. I’ve never made any ad hominem attacks.
most dave ramsey listners haven't a clue what you are saying I never followed his investing advice and have done great my whole life but again his followers are regular 9to5 folks who like giving their hard earned cash over in a 401k and forgetting about till 70 if they even live that long that is where i differ I have invested my cash since I was 18 and have never had a mortgage I am 54 retired and would never be able 2 say that listening 2 bad advice such as good ole dave sometimes I deduct 10% sometimes 3% at between 50 and 60 k per year interest payment who cares also I have a paid for house and car
Damn, not saying Dave was right. But it is funny that the dude looks like a nerd living in his mom's basement. 😂 if anything it makes me trust his math more!
This is the epitome of a coastline problem. My family of 4 can live off of a portfolio worth 540k in perpetuity using the 4% rule and having no debts besides a mortgage. If yall are this worried about your retirement, listen to Dave. Pay off consumer debt. If you're still worried, move out of the NYC flat and into a 4 bed in Kansas
@@jermainesullivan3330 Yep. Grocery bill is $375 a month. They're still young. By the time they're eating out of house and home the mortgage is paid off
@@amireallythatgrumpy6508 I'm trying to understand what you're talking about. are you saying that we are missing the ball on 4% vs 8% and that we shouldn't have to touch our retirement funds at all? I'm not sure how one would go about doing that (and if they could why they would even need a retirement fund).
@@j.asmrgaming1228 Retirement funds are a glorified emergency fund. With any emergency fund (and by extension retirement fund) the goal should be to have it there in case you need it while simultaneously ensuring that you do NOT need it. The proper way is to create a lifelong revenue stream that you can live off for life.
@@amireallythatgrumpy6508 I mean sure, but I feel like your whole if you have to touch your retirement funds you've failed at life is a bit disingenuous. by that same logic you shouldn't have retirement funds or emergency funds because if you have to touch either you're a failure. It's a catch 22.
Opinion vs Data....Dave is incorrect. Nothing personal. He is an entertainer looking for eyeballs. Very different motivation vs the facts which are easily available.
Your guest is making the same mistake other experts have. He’s assuming he knows Dave’s investments. Dave has never revealed his investments, as far as I know. He claims his investments constantly beat the S&P. He also makes the mistake, as most Financial planners that most people will live to be 90. For most of us it’s not going to happen. Most planners will not recommend 100% investments to a retired person. The 4% rule isn’t even close to what Dave recommends. He did say if you invest in the way I teach. Which is 100% stocks 100% of the time. I didn’t invest that way while I was working. I certainly don’t in retirement. So I’m smart enough to know not to do 8%. The fact is we don’t know what the market will do in the future.
@@howardfriedman7077 as a result they leave a lot of money on the table for most of their clients. The author of the 4% has since updated his original paper. He now recommends the 4.7% rule based on a 63/47 portfolio. There’s not a one size fit all. Some may need 2.5 % withdrawal strategy and some may can do 8%.
So I asked chatgpt: Starting 1/1/2001 to its latest data if you withdrew 8% from an SP 500 index fund starting with $500,000 would you have run out of money? The answer was no. It did decline with the market decline in 09 but it has not run out of money. Is Dave really wrong?
Only the diehard Dave Ramsey defenders think this berry is tiny. Just wait until a generation of Ramsey listeners start taking 8% withdrawals from their portfolios and run out of money in 15 years.
@@DavidMcKnight That's all fine, whatever they decide to do is their problem. I just feel like you've done three videos totaling an hour and a half worth of content around this phone call already.
Anyone who retired in 1998-2002 and used an 8% withdrawal rate was wiped out, some more quickly than others. This prompts the question - Why did we not start hearing about his in 2010, when the 2000 retirees were wiped out? I suspect the dave audience are those with huge credit card debt, and retiring on Social Security and little else. If his audience had a demographic that actually saved enough to be significant at retirement, we'd have heard an overwhelming outcry of "I listened to Dave and lost all my money". FWIW, I retired at 50. My withdrawal rate is about 5%, but only because our social security is still projected to cover half our budget. i.e. in a few years, the 5% can drop closer to 2.5%. Even less, as my mortgage will be done shortly, and it was 10% of budget. And rental property will be paid off, and the cash from that, another 10% of budget.
Look at the numbers, the folks that actually have 1-2 million at time of retirement in stocks, end up taking out 4% and concerned they will go broke, and when they die, their investments are worth more than they where when they officially retired, the plan that R says, is that if you take 8% then you can die with nothing.
Dave said you take what you have and adjust your withdrawal percentage based on inflation. So the average inflation is around 4%. So if you’re making 12% you CAN take 8%. If you’re making 10% you can withdraw 6% without touching your nest egg. Dave also has made 12% and CAN prove it. He lives what he preaches and you clowns are trying to get views and exposure riding his coattails. I’m averaging roughly 11% and I withdraw 7% and my best egg hasn’t been touched.
George could definitely do fine on his own. He has proven himself to be a vital asset to the company and through his own efforts went from $40000 in debt to Millionaire in Ten years.
Dave have a one track mind himself. He also against Whole Life Insurance (becoming your own bank). Have he ever talked about putting your home in a trust for Medicaid?
The same George that COMPLETELY misrepresented IUL with several misconceptions? Guy is speaking as an authority when he himself doesn’t even understand the product, Dave Ramsay nailed his assessment of him right on the head… just on the wrong subject.
![ARGENTINA vs. PERÚ [1-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 12](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xtI25ENDDSY/mqdefault.jpg)
I have no problem with folks disagreeing. That's healthy. I am hurt that my friend Dave said mean things about my friend George Kamel in the public forum. It will make George even more beloved by the public. Folks enjoy standing up for the underdog, for sure!
I watched the same episode and was appalled at how poorly he treated George, who actually researched the math and is clearly more in-touch with the current financial world as a common person. Dave is worth half a billion and does not live in the same world as you and I do.
and has become a darling of the finacial community honestly. love george
@@jasonmoquin
❤
@@jasonmoquinGeorge research? Have you seen his take on cash value life insurance? He states misconception after misconception. Dave landed it right on the head. Just wrong subject.
@@Bryan-om3wq , I am not familiar with the topic you mentioned, his take on it, or whether you yourself having anything but passing knowledge about it to use as a framework of expertise. That aside, one topic is not another and I do have considerable experience in retirement planning and what one would consider reasonable distribution for portfolio longevity. George was spot on this time and his take is not only supported by massive amounts of research but is also in consensus with every single prominent financial advisor out there. You don’t have to defend Dave for getting it wrong here….and he absolutely is when that advice is being handed down to normal people without a half-billion- dollar asset portfolio. He’s a grown man, albeit a stubborn one, and is not right about everything.
I’m glad that Dave is finally getting exposed. He’s been touting this incorrect Math for years. What’s worse is how he threw his co-host George under the bus. Real Christian like there Dave 🙃.
Lol Tha k you
Dave has always been a bombastic jackass
Always
Dave always humiliates his callers. At least he pays his staff for the privilege of being yelled at.
Yeah, Ramsey is a fraud.
I’m sure an 8% withdraw rate would work for a small percentage of people who are older and have plenty of money. But Dave saying that 8% is a rule of thumb is wildly irresponsible
This!! Risk is not linear! Investment advice does not scale up or down easily.
The max year drop of the fund I'm looking at is 50% and has a return of 11.85 over 30 yrs, which in that dip, 8% IS 4% of the initial balance. Why is Dave wrong except being cocky 😅
I think 4-5% is definitely better. If there is a need for more or less some years, then so be it. But, the calculations need to be run. 8% may work for some people, but the problem is how Dave just flat-out would not entertain the discussion.
I have listened to lots of Dave’s shows this past year. Some good tips, others not. With him, I have learned to be an open-book, do my own research, then make an educated decision. I think the majority of Dave’s listeners, given their mostly desperate situations, just take everything he says as truth with a one-size-fits-all approach.
Exactly
The max year drop of the fund I'm looking at is 50% and has a return of 11.85 over 30 yrs, which in that dip, 8% IS 4% of the initial balance. Why is Dave wrong except being cocky 😅
A 60 something old lady called in a few months ago. She said that she was hospitalized for a period two years prior. When she got out of the hospital, she found out that she had been fired. 2 years later, she found out that she had medical bills in collections that she didn't that she knew about. She thought that she had been covered by her health insurance that she had while she was still working that job. Dave's response to this woman was: Duh, of course you weren't covered. I find him to be really tough to take sometimes. I use to cringe when he had that pod commercials where he called their competitors arrogant movers. Why are they arrogant Dave? Is it because they don't sponsor your company? I will listen, but he really is my least favorite. Sometimes, his nastiness has nothing to do with tough love.
I just feel sorry for George being put in this awkward position with his employer for no good reason. George is correct.
No he is not. Do not withdraw more than 1% under any circumstances.
@@amireallythatgrumpy6508 I need more than 1%, just to pay the taxes on my withdrawal! Wait! Did I just blow it with my provisional income? Somebody call IRMA! Why does financial life have to be so complicated? I think I put too much sugar on my bowl of Special 401K. I'm taking the standard reduction from now on.
i just want to know who in thier retirement would put 100% of their nest egg into mutual funds if you need to rely on the returns. So i think 12% is a bit optimistic for a retired person
And if his 12% is always true, a person with a 3% mortgage would be smarter to take the extra money and invest it at 12% vs paying off the mortgage.
I do like 90% of what he teaches, but nobody is right 100% of the time.
That is a great point! If you can truly count on 12% per year then the answer to his question "Would you take out a mortgage on your home to invest?" should be YES! Of course! You said I could count on 12%.
Nice interview. I have an MBA in finance and am a math nerd at age 76. My analysis shows 8% is a good number provided that withdrawal is partially put aside for those years where SPY drops. SPY is the best in my opinion and increased over 25% recently annually. Our rule is simple, we withdraw the annual increase in January and no more. And spend half of that over the year.
Great thoughtful reality based conversation! New subscriber, loving your content!❤
To me Dave Ramsey's primary mission has always been to make money from advertising and getting people to pay for his programs. he makes advertising money from having a large audience. entertainment not financial advise.
He is not an RIA, nor is he a broker, but rather simply a radio talk show host. No one should be taking what he says as financial advise!
@11:30 Dave will never admit he is wrong on this. He has told a lot of already-retired people how much to save, where to invest and when to retire. Admitting he is wrong about this is admitting his advice will lead a significant number of them into a future of complete financial ruin, the complete opposite of what he promises. Why would anybody watch a finance show that has lead a significant number of people directly into relative poverty?
Financial "Piece" University
I’m approaching retirement and my portfolio has remained stagnant despite having solid companies in it. I'm willing to make huge investments if profits come in big leaps too, but are there any calculated money-making opportunities during a recession?
generating substantial gains at uncertain times involves experience and intricate strategies best executed by financial planners to me
@@valentinaarrelaroTrue, despite setbacks and losses amid '20 pandemic crash, I was able to stay afloat and outperform, only cause I had an advisor overseeing my portfolio. As of today, I've accrued nearly $1m roi after 100s of thousands invested subsequently
@@M.Morgan this is striking! who is your invt_advisor please, if you dont mind me asking? in dire need of strategic asset allocation
@@chadgriffith1969I take guidance from Katherine Nance Dietz, you may have come across her before, she’s quite a sought-after advisor, extremely professional, highly knowledgeable, and very easy to work with.
@@M.Morgan your recommendation comes handy and well appreciated, curiously inputed her full name on my browser, and i'm super impressed with what i've seen so far... hoping to end the year effortlessly winning
Everyone but Dave knows that Dave is wrong... and honestly, I think he really knows, but is too stubborn/arrogant to change his stance on anything, just because he has said over & over he is "right". Saying anything else, would mean he was actually "wrong", and if he changes his mind on anything, that would mean anyone following his program can change their minds on the "steps". Personal finance isn't even a 100% right/wrong concept, so his thought process is flawed. Love his community and the debt free living concept and I appreciate his years on service to the public.
Well said.
Very well said
The max year drop of the fund I'm looking at is 50% and has a return of 11.85 over 30 yrs, which in that dip, 8% IS 4% of the initial balance. Why is Dave wrong except being cocky.
Yes personal finance is nuanced but they agree on a level but no one see that, they just see, 'haha Dave is wrong'
Haven't heard anyone address that mathematically it is sustainable as Dave said, but you cannot take a flat sum but a percentage if you work it like that.
Isn't the funny part that Dave always calls himself the nerd of the family? He likes the cred he gets from being a nerd, but all the other nerds are punching calculators in their Mom's basement. We used the baby steps to get out of debt and build up a bridge fund and nest egg that will allow us to retire earlier, so I'm grateful for that wisdom, but I've never really dialed into Dave's investment strategy. I could never find the combo of funds he claims to use that average 12-13% per year. He's off base here, but too far down the road to walk it back I guess.
The max year drop of the fund I'm looking at is 50% and has a return of 11.85 over 30 yrs (VUG), which in that dip, 8% IS 4% of the initial balance. Why is Dave wrong except being cocky 😅
Of course this can change cuz every one knows past performance is always and indicator of future returns
Time for Dave to admit hes wrong. He has completely lost touch with the average person and its super dangerous for people with less than $25M in investments
Dave did not lose touch, the people did. The people fear thinking. Most of them have never used their brain in their lives.
@amireallythatgrumpy6508 lol dude if you think you can take 8% from your Retirement accounts and that you will get a 12% return in perpetuity then you deserve to lose it all I guess
The people have never had a clue. If you think withdrawing more than 1% of your retirement savings a year is a good idea, then you are dumber than a brick. If you even need to use your retirement savings t all, you have failed at life just like the other hundreds of millions of Americans. Like I say, you have never used your brain in your life. @@buckibanker
@@buckibanker 40% of the time, it works! Pretty good odds.
@@avernvrey7422but about 11% not good enough 😂
George needs to leave Ramsey Solutions and be on his own. He is a lot more entertaining and easier to listen to when not having to parrot Ramsey's archaic advise. He can preach basic principles of Ramsey without being so stubborn and condescending.
George and subject matter experts all agree- a 4% (or less) withdrawal rate is the safe and sound bet. Of course, if you have a business infotainment empire your milage may vary.
Dave is beyond arrogant and believes he knows all and everyone else is below him. I would never follow any of his advice purely for that reason alone. Too many other good, honest, and ACCURATE advisors out here to think that you'd need Daves advice.
No mother would let him have that map in her basement. See Dave is wrong ;-)
Giving bad advice for retirement is a fiduciary duty. How a person can do this with no license shows his commitment to unethical behavior.
We're in uncharted territory now. With Bidenomics in play, even having dollars is unpredictable at best. Are going to do things the same way as we did 20 to 40 years ago?
Thank you for stating this, Dave has been ignoring the unprecedented and severe negative economics from this current Administration, Congress and the Federal Reserve.
While Dave’s advice has help so many get out of debt and achieve the first level of financial freedom, he needs to adjust his advice to the changing of the economic landscape, especially for retirement, it’s a fiduciary obligation to do so, because things are always changing and unfortunately for the worse on a macro and micro economic levels.
Imagine having to go back to work at 75 or 80 because you followed Dave’s advice…
Right. Brutal.
If you actually followed his advice properly you would not retire until you reached that age anyway.
Imagine waiting till your 70 to save a unrealistic amount of money, so when you pass you are the wealthiest person in the grave yard.
Why on Earth would anyone be so stupid? "Gee, my money is going down really fast, stock market is down pretty far, better keep withdrawing at the same rate Dave told me to". Wouldn't most people course correct?
I found Dave Ramsey as a young girl in debt anxiety. This was pre-personal computer days. I read an article in the financial times and adopted Dave’s Baby Steps. 30 years later I’m proud to report I’ve lived a debt free life, own a home and, have six figures in my 401k. Looking forward to a reassuring retirement. Just saying, Dave’s budget advice is spot on.
I love his debt advice.
@@DavidMcKnightI don't love his debt advice. I can't get past how illogical it is to ignore interest rates and go by dollar amount of debts for payoff. That's just dumb.
Dave Ramsey has done a phenomenal job creating a generation of financially literate viewers.
• I am able to respect his previous and ongoing contributions to financial literacy. BUT
• I am using the 4% rule to plan my retirement.
In 2023 the Internet has democratized access to financial literature. Everyone who has the initiative to work (earn a paycheck) should take the initiative to read and learn how much you need to save for retirement. Or how much you can withdraw from your retirement account.
I am passionate about this and hope each of us plan for retirement just as we plan our lives.
Dave is good at one thing only, paying off debt. His other advice is problematic. Few people get 12 % every year, most people have more than sp500 investments, which means it could be much less than 12 % per year. You did not get 12 % this year in reits. I also don't agree that Dave does not recommend pre nups. So if you divorce, 60% do, you now pay for litigation lawyers.
His advice for paying off debt is also stuoid. Never ignore the interest rates. Pay highest rate debt off first, not his dumb method.
And, Dave preaches managed funds over no-load funds which would cost 1% to 2% knocking down your withdrawal rate even further.
despite numerous studies, Dave knows in his heart that he is right with taking lots of risk with your money...
You may be able to take 8% its all about sequence of return. Retirement timing could make even 4% not doable.
Would love the hear you two discuss a bucket type of strategy and how that all works out.
Great content Dave. Happy Thanksgiving
Thanks Chris!
dave needs to retire and let his daughter and George take over he is getting really grumpy
Being grumpy can only be a good thing.
He used to say 10%!
The stock market has had (3) 10 year stretches during the last 100 years where the market showed a loss, 1930-1940, 1965-1975 & 2000-2010.
If a retiree lived through just one of those periods while withdrawing 8% a year, he or she would be looking for a job.
It seems clear that when Dave Ramsey speaks of withdrawing 8% each year in retirement, he's not talking about withdrawing 8% in the first year and adjusting that dollar amount for inflation in subsequent years per the Bill Bengen approach. He is speaking of a fixed percentage withdrawal: withdrawing 8% the first year, 8% the second year, and so on. With this approach, he's mathematically correct--the portfolio can never be depleted. The result, however, is likely to be wildly variable year-to-year withdrawal amounts in terms of dollars.
Nope. He’s talking about 8% of the day 1 retirement balance. He’s fond of saying, if you have $1,000,000 in retirement your portfolio will lay 80,000 golden eggs every year. If you do this, however, your portfolio runs out about 2/3 of the time over a 30- year retirement.
@@DavidMcKnight No you are wrong!
@@darlenepaul2918 😀
No. Year one you get $80k. Year two you are compounding off of $920k, that is $73k and you take out $7k to make up for shortfall. It is a chain. A down year has you realize losses with less invested capital to recover.
Dave can collapse his brand, look at bud light. Dave’s stubbornness and failure to adapt can ruin his reputation
It already has
Never mind taking my hope and motivation away. I want truth.
Math>feelings
The longer prediction is, the unreliable outcome has. It might be underestimate inflationary risk even at 4%.
Start with a buffer of 3-5 years. Draw from that. Put that buffer in a savings account earning 3%-4%. The rest you put in a stock portfolio. Just watch your portfolio. If you make say 15% on that withdraw and put it in your buffer. If you have a bad year, just live of your buffer. If you have a great year in your portfolio of say 25% then put some additional in your buffer to make up of for a bad year.
You’re saying put the 15% growth into the 3-4% savings account?
@@DavidMcKnight Yes, because from that buffer you live off. The rest can keep on growing. So if there is a bad year or even three bad years in your stock portfolio it doesn’t hurt you as you don’t need to withdraw from your portfolio - you still have the buffer. If you have a five year buffer you will be ok. The chances of having five bad years in a row in the stock market are very slim.
I use a CD ladder 3 year ladder every 6 months a CD is at maturity. If the market is down I use those funds if the market is up I withdraw from either my Roth or traditional IRA depending on taxes.my IRA and Roth are 100 % invested in stocks.
One thing about Dave that surprises me is that he invests in international funds being as they're not very attractive return wise (yeah yeah past performance doesn't predict future performance) since he preaches a consistent high percentage return one would think he would preach 100% U.S. funds
I am a HUGE Dave Ramsey fan. However, Dave Ramsey never addresses that , when the market drops over the course of a year, his formula means you can take $0 dollars out of your investments. The 3% rule allows for down market years…Ramsey’s does not.
@mikemiller4305 Have you tried a keto diet?
I like Dave, but he’s dead wrong on this one!
When does Ramsey say that he suggests 8% adjusted for inflation. I believe he said just 8%, which will work.
If market is up 12%since 1972it doesn't mean everyone is making 12%a year. Most people probably don't.
Whiteriver the government makes me take out is my withdrawal plan.
Ramsey should have been angry, 3 % withdraw rate is bad advice. Most would feel they would never have the means to retire. So what are they projecting to keep all of your money in a checking account.
60/40 stock bond mix gives you a 4% sustainable withdrawal rate over 30 years with an 86% success rate.
Sick of people using “basement dwelling incels” or some variation to denigrate people they disagree with. He didn’t say incel but that’s common to hear that tacked onto the basement dweller insult.
Perhaps Dave needs Dr. Leo Marvin to coach him through the baby steps of introspection/stepping down from your high horse/humilty/apologizing.
Dave Ramsey always shows his bully side any time someone verbalizes an argument that opposes his zealous ideology. You see this a lot from people with deeply rooted, religious backgrounds. Most of the time, you are better off to avoid these people altogether because they will never allow themselves to explore logic or reason. With these people, there is their doctrine and if you don’t like it; you are wrong.
Wow! What a prejudice thing to say.
@carolhale4331 I think you meant "what a truthful thing to say". Seems to have stung you lol.
Yes BUT is he living in his mom’s basement ?
“UHM”.
No respect for those who tear down someone to get ahead in their own business. Smells like jealousy & makes you look bad. You don't have to agree with your competition, neither do you have to try to destroy your competition. Just do your thing & leave everyone else out of it. That makes you look like a good person.
Not tearing down. Just challenging worldviews in an attempt to advance dialogue aground sustainable planning principles. I’ve never made any ad hominem attacks.
What do you think Dave does to his competition?
Dave lacks humility and George lacks a spine. But we're all lacking something. I could go for a bowl of fruity pebbles, but I don't have any.
Word is Dave will not return to the air
He just was this morning
He returned to the air on December 11.
most dave ramsey listners haven't a clue what you are saying I never followed his investing advice and have done great my whole life but again his followers are regular 9to5 folks who like giving their hard earned cash over in a 401k and forgetting about till 70 if they even live that long that is where i differ I have invested my cash since I was 18 and have never had a mortgage I am 54 retired and would never be able 2 say that listening 2 bad advice such as good ole dave sometimes I deduct 10% sometimes 3% at between 50 and 60 k per year interest payment who cares also I have a paid for house and car
54 and retired? So an idiot then?
His fans are mostly idiots.
Damn, not saying Dave was right. But it is funny that the dude looks like a nerd living in his mom's basement. 😂 if anything it makes me trust his math more!
Dave’s portfolio only goes up. So did Bernie Madoff’s.😂We just need to be invested in the right funds!
Dave acted like a piece of shit which I guess is fine since it's his company
This is the epitome of a coastline problem.
My family of 4 can live off of a portfolio worth 540k in perpetuity using the 4% rule and having no debts besides a mortgage.
If yall are this worried about your retirement, listen to Dave. Pay off consumer debt. If you're still worried, move out of the NYC flat and into a 4 bed in Kansas
Living off $1800 per month to feed a family of four?!?!?!
@@jermainesullivan3330
Yep.
Grocery bill is $375 a month. They're still young. By the time they're eating out of house and home the mortgage is paid off
Dave even said he hasn’t withdraw from his fund. So he is speaking out of some bogus theory and not practice.
Withdrawing from your retiring funds should only ever be theory and not practice. If you actually need that money, you have failed at life.
@@amireallythatgrumpy6508 I'm trying to understand what you're talking about. are you saying that we are missing the ball on 4% vs 8% and that we shouldn't have to touch our retirement funds at all? I'm not sure how one would go about doing that (and if they could why they would even need a retirement fund).
@@j.asmrgaming1228 Retirement funds are a glorified emergency fund. With any emergency fund (and by extension retirement fund) the goal should be to have it there in case you need it while simultaneously ensuring that you do NOT need it. The proper way is to create a lifelong revenue stream that you can live off for life.
@@amireallythatgrumpy6508 I mean sure, but I feel like your whole if you have to touch your retirement funds you've failed at life is a bit disingenuous. by that same logic you shouldn't have retirement funds or emergency funds because if you have to touch either you're a failure. It's a catch 22.
@@j.asmrgaming1228 You should have them but never use them. Not a catch 22 at all.
Opinion vs Data....Dave is incorrect. Nothing personal. He is an entertainer looking for eyeballs. Very different motivation vs the facts which are easily available.
Your guest is making the same mistake other experts have. He’s assuming he knows Dave’s investments. Dave has never revealed his investments, as far as I know. He claims his investments constantly beat the S&P. He also makes the mistake, as most Financial planners that most people will live to be 90. For most of us it’s not going to happen. Most planners will not recommend 100% investments to a retired person. The 4% rule isn’t even close to what Dave recommends. He did say if you invest in the way I teach. Which is 100% stocks 100% of the time. I didn’t invest that way while I was working. I certainly don’t in retirement. So I’m smart enough to know not to do 8%. The fact is we don’t know what the market will do in the future.
@@howardfriedman7077 as a result they leave a lot of money on the table for most of their clients. The author of the 4% has since updated his original paper. He now recommends the 4.7% rule based on a 63/47 portfolio. There’s not a one size fit all. Some may need 2.5 % withdrawal strategy and some may can do 8%.
So I asked chatgpt: Starting 1/1/2001 to its latest data if you withdrew 8% from an SP 500 index fund starting with $500,000 would you have run out of money? The answer was no. It did decline with the market decline in 09 but it has not run out of money. Is Dave really wrong?
You gotta do more than 1 iteration AND chatgpt is notoriously wrong on financial matters. So wouldn’t rely on that as gospel.
According to Portfolio Visualizer, by withdrawing and inflation adjusted 8% begining in 2001, you will run out if money in November of 2011
Even if you assume 2 percentage points better than s&p you would have run out of money.
When is Dave going to apologize for giving terrible advice?
He's been giving terrible advice for decades, so never lol.
Idk why this keeps showing up in my algorithm but im impressed at how much juice you're trying to saqeeze out of this tiny berry.
Only the diehard Dave Ramsey defenders think this berry is tiny. Just wait until a generation of Ramsey listeners start taking 8% withdrawals from their portfolios and run out of money in 15 years.
@@DavidMcKnight
That's all fine, whatever they decide to do is their problem. I just feel like you've done three videos totaling an hour and a half worth of content around this phone call already.
@@toeknee5565 Ride it out and milk the PR opportunities, which have happened over the past couple of days.
@@toeknee5565and I keep watching them!
@davidmcknight keep it coming the numbers people talk about are crazy high. Rob hope if that’s the reality of the situation.
Anyone who retired in 1998-2002 and used an 8% withdrawal rate was wiped out, some more quickly than others.
This prompts the question - Why did we not start hearing about his in 2010, when the 2000 retirees were wiped out? I suspect the dave audience are those with huge credit card debt, and retiring on Social Security and little else. If his audience had a demographic that actually saved enough to be significant at retirement, we'd have heard an overwhelming outcry of "I listened to Dave and lost all my money". FWIW, I retired at 50.
My withdrawal rate is about 5%, but only because our social security is still projected to cover half our budget. i.e. in a few years, the 5% can drop closer to 2.5%. Even less, as my mortgage will be done shortly, and it was 10% of budget. And rental property will be paid off, and the cash from that, another 10% of budget.
Look at the numbers, the folks that actually have 1-2 million at time of retirement in stocks, end up taking out 4% and concerned they will go broke, and when they die, their investments are worth more than they where when they officially retired, the plan that R says, is that if you take 8% then you can die with nothing.
This n drier than sand
Definitely not as exciting as 8% withdrawal rates!
Dave said you take what you have and adjust your withdrawal percentage based on inflation. So the average inflation is around 4%. So if you’re making 12% you CAN take 8%. If you’re making 10% you can withdraw 6% without touching your nest egg. Dave also has made 12% and CAN prove it. He lives what he preaches and you clowns are trying to get views and exposure riding his coattails. I’m averaging roughly 11% and I withdraw 7% and my best egg hasn’t been touched.
Right or wrong isn't the issue. Spouting philosophy your boss doesn't jive with is the issue. Mr. bad jokes needs to remember who signs his checks.
Maybe George will go solo like the young black guy who was with Dave before.
@@MrTmenzothey got fired.
mrtmenzo is referring to Anthony Oneal not Chris Hogan. Chris got fired for marital infidelity, Anthony left to pursue his own interests.
George could definitely do fine on his own. He has proven himself to be a vital asset to the company and through his own efforts went from $40000 in debt to Millionaire in Ten years.
Incorrect. Anthony O'Neill was not fired. @@joeriveracomedy
Yall overhyped the levels of this "meltdown"
Dave practically insulted George. I didn’t like it at all.
Your ignorance shows, you did not watch the Nov 2nd Dave Ramsey meltdown.
Or like that kind of ‘boss bully’ thing 😏
Dave have a one track mind himself. He also against Whole Life Insurance (becoming your own bank). Have he ever talked about putting your home in a trust for Medicaid?
They did not use math or evidence to prove Dave wrong. Why are they getting their panties in a bunch? Show us why Dave is wrong.
The same George that COMPLETELY misrepresented IUL with several misconceptions? Guy is speaking as an authority when he himself doesn’t even understand the product, Dave Ramsay nailed his assessment of him right on the head… just on the wrong subject.