You might be able to make a case for kids as historically having been somewhat of a "retirement plan" (although the journal article linked in the post begs to differ). Still it's a worthwhile question to ponder. Should you always be driven by the economics of a situation?
The now-deposed (in what seemed an ugly fashion) former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd got some feedback on comments he made on the population aging issue. The author of the article isn't a fan and although I think that she made some worthwhile points she also seems a little bit disconnected from reality.
There's a new documentary on the stock market crash out examining the knowledge that bank executives (and the like) had regarding the potential for collapse:
Of course, the same conflicts of interest apply to pretty much any investment advisor.
"It turns out that C.F.O.’s, as a group, display terrible calibration. [T]hese executives weren’t particularly good at forecasting the stock market. In fact, their predictions were negatively correlated with actual returns. ... as a group, many of these executives apparently don’t realize that they lack forecasting ability."
I'd kinda like something like this, although I wonder how well the user interface works in practice:
Somehow I wonder how durable something like this would be.
Had a crock pot I gave up on the weekend and am now planning to throw out (it shuts itself off at random time intervals). Now I'm down to only four slow cookers. Whatever am I to do?
