Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Um it's time for more like a 6 percent hike for Feds....
Has any organization done an analysis of how much Feds have lost realistically during the past 6 years? Premiums are up, cost of living in DC area is insane, and we've received nothing and then minimal increases.
Friendly reminder of how unkind President Obama has been to feds with the 2011-13 COLA freeze and a paltry ~1% since. Since 2010, it's been pretty rough:
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Um it's time for more like a 6 percent hike for Feds....
That's, um, not gonna happen.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Um it's time for more like a 6 percent hike for Feds....
Has any organization done an analysis of how much Feds have lost realistically during the past 6 years? Premiums are up, cost of living in DC area is insane, and we've received nothing and then minimal increases.

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Um it's time for more like a 6 percent hike for Feds....
Has any organization done an analysis of how much Feds have lost realistically during the past 6 years? Premiums are up, cost of living in DC area is insane, and we've received nothing and then minimal increases.
Anonymous wrote:Um it's time for more like a 6 percent hike for Feds....
Anonymous wrote:Um it's time for more like a 6 percent hike for Feds....
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Are there really any disadvantages to simply putting all my money in the C fund and letting it ride for years rather than allocating between several funds? It has the best returns track record, and I am not that risk averse. I am mid 30's.
No, there is not. But times are good now...could you stomach losing half or more of your nest egg in a bear market over a few short months, weeks, or even a day? It happened in '08-'09 with no end in sight which caused many to panic sell and retreat into the G-Fund, wiping out years of gains. You never lose a single dime until the day you sell since the number of shares you own does not change (only the price). But if you do sell at a huge loss, the earnings are lost forever. At that point it's a mental game and battle of intestinal fortitude.
Determining the amount of risk you are willing to take and not panic when the market is choppy is the hard part of investing. Historically, a 60/40 portfolio has performed (predictably) a little less than 100/0 portfolio, but at a fraction of the risk. 50/50, 60/40, 70/30 is much more manageable for the average investor saving in a 401k/TSP as compared to 100/0. There is also the feeling of missing out during down markets because a 100/0 portfolio has no "dry powder" to buy stock in the dip. https://personal.vanguard.com/us/insights/saving-investing/model-portfolio-allocations
![]()
Anonymous wrote:
Hey why do I need to rebalance my fund allocations? I chose my fund allocations, but why do they automatically steer one way and go out of wack? Basic question I know...it's just strange that the allocations change. Is it based on how well one is doing? The allocations automatically change?
Anonymous wrote:
I assume you are referring to L funds?
Anonymous wrote:Are there really any disadvantages to simply putting all my money in the C fund and letting it ride for years rather than allocating between several funds? It has the best returns track record, and I am not that risk averse. I am mid 30's.