Is There a Safe Way to Beat Inflation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter FallenApple
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inflation
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on finding non-risky methods to beat inflation, currently estimated at around 2% annually. Concerns are raised about the diminishing value of cash savings, prompting inquiries into safe investment options. While some participants argue that index funds are a strong hedge against inflation, they emphasize the importance of diversification to mitigate risks. Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS) are highlighted as a government-backed option that adjusts for inflation, providing a reliable, albeit lower, yield. The conversation also touches on the necessity of investing in personal skills to secure higher-paying jobs as a means to stay ahead of inflation. Participants debate the balance between maintaining liquidity for emergencies and pursuing higher returns through investments, with some advocating for a mix of liquid savings and riskier investments. The overarching theme stresses that while complete risk elimination is impossible, strategic financial planning and investment can help preserve and grow wealth in the face of inflation.
  • #51
TeethWhitener said:
I originally assumed you were talking about medical tourism (visiting a country with lower healthcare costs to undergo a costly procedure), but now it sounds like you just want to skip out on paying a debt. I’m not sure that’s advisable. At any rate, I doubt that fleeing the country is any more advisable than declaring bankruptcy.

In the spirit of your original question, the highest risk-free return comes from paying down debt if you have it (assuming the interest on the debt is higher than inflation—almost a certainty). If you don’t have any debt, TIPS are probably the way to go, as mentioned.
Right in-line with earlier mention of not spending more than (you know) you need. Difficult to "beat" inflation if you like to spend for more things than you need or really want. (Spend less on 'things', and you'll have more to invest.)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #52
BWV said:
At the bottoms of the past few bear markets 10 year real returns of the S&P 500 were negative. There is a ‘gamblers ruin’ issue if you need to draw on your funds but they are temporarily down 30-50% in value. The 30 year time weighted return may be fine, but having to liquidate risky assets at a trough valuation to buy groceries can destroy wealth

That's a big problem. The best solution I know, is the Donnely Zone System (although not the full solution to the above because you are fully invested when there is a downturn):
https://investingtimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/The-Zone-System-research-paper.pdf
http://www.investors.asn.au/assets/resources/seminars/2018/Syd-Seminar-November-2018/3-Russell-Lees.pdf

Ignore the commercial part of the above but it was the system I used when I traded (I was a long term trader - tried some others but it suited me best). Austin Donnelly was one of my heroes because what he wrote about actually worked and was a tireless campaigner against investor scams exposing the ripoff of things like trailing commissions. He also, using the zoning system, consistently picked market crashes - its simple but it worked.

To fix being fully invested during a downturn, and that is when you may require the money, sometimes called the failure of portfolio theory, as you get closer to using it, gradually move to a 50-50 mix of cash and shares. You can of course have a 50-50 allocation all the time - it was what I did - I was conservative,

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited:
  • #53
TeethWhitener said:
I originally assumed you were talking about medical tourism (visiting a country with lower healthcare costs to undergo a costly procedure), but now it sounds like you just want to skip out on paying a debt. I’m not sure that’s advisable. At any rate, I doubt that fleeing the country is any more advisable than declaring bankruptcy.

In the spirit of your original question, the highest risk-free return comes from paying down debt if you have it (assuming the interest on the debt is higher than inflation—almost a certainty). If you don’t have any debt, TIPS are probably the way to go, as mentioned.

Oh no, that didn't happen. I'm just saying that if it did, that is what I would do. I'm the type of person that refuses to be slave to financial liabilities. I'm sure that in such a scenario, I would try bankruptcy first, while at the same time packing my bags just in case. It's doomsday scenarios like this that scares me. I had a close call one time, but it was written off as charity. I nearly had a nervous breakdown because of that.

Clearly in the case of a 100k+ medical debt, skipping out on it is a absolute must, even if it means relocation. Why? Well, it saves 100k. Thats why. That's equivalent to a house overseas.

This is why a large emergency fund is so important. In case I need 5 figures of cash to set up a new life, which would actually save me money in the long run. There are several other scenarios that I can think of that's in the same ballpark which can realistically happen to anyone. (e.g imploding economy, job loss etc).
 
Last edited:
  • #54
Thread closed for Moderation...
 
  • #55
Thread will remain closed. Thanks to all who participated.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba

Similar threads

Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
46
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
22
Views
590
Replies
16
Views
4K
Back
Top