Stocks, Bonds or Cash ... Where to Put Our Long Term Savings ... 'The Great Winfield Explains Kids Markets'

The stock market has had a tough month and year thus far. The story over the past several years and decades, however, is a completely different one.

Over time investing our long term savings in stocks beats investing in anything else by a large margin.

So why don't more people, and especially young people, take into proper consideration the certainty of short term stock market volatility and frequent stock price declines compared to the almost certain long term benefits of stock market investing and share price increases for satisfying their long term financial needs?

Is it due to a lack of knowledge? And if it is, then please consider the following helpful information and market history in Bull market in stocks will resume when we're older and wiser:

                

"This bull market’s long-term health desperately depends on investors first becoming older and wiser about what’s realistic.

Unfortunately, we’re not there yet, despite the stock market’s recent turmoil. It’s a particularly bad long-term omen that there have been so many cries of anguish over the recent report that Treasury bills have beaten both stocks and bonds so far this year.

This isn’t to deny that it’s been a long time since this was the case — more than 20 years, in fact. But the last two-plus decades are the exception rather than the historical rule. Over the past two centuries . . . T-bills have outperformed both stocks and government bonds in an average of more than one of every five calendar years.

Bull markets’ long-term health is dependent on investors knowing this historical fact and appreciating what it teaches us about risk. One way of viewing bear markets’ function is to educate successive younger generations to this risk and to re-educate older generations who have forgotten it.

It is interesting to note in this regard that the 2008-2009 bear market only partially succeeded in educating people. That’s because bonds soared during that equity debacle, seducing investors into the false sense of security that they will be OK as long as they diversify their portfolio between stocks and bonds.

As you can see from the chart above, this assumption is not infrequently wrong.

But won’t stocks and bond investors come out ahead of Treasury bills if they hold on long enough?

Yes, provided the future is like the past and — an even bigger if — you hold on the for the very long term. Even when we expand our focus to 10-year holding periods, as you can see from the chart, T-bills still have beaten both equities and fixed income more than one of every 10 times. . . .

One of the more hilarious descriptions of the role historical memory plays in the market cycle appears in the investment classic “The Money Game,” pseudonymously written by Adam Smith. He described how the market oscillates between two different sentiment environments depending on whether historical memory helps or gets in the way.

On the one hand, he wrote, there are so-called “kids markets” in which those making the most money are too young to remember the last bear market. At the other extreme are periods when it’s crucial to remember that the markets can go down just as easily as go up.

Smith described a friend of his called The Great Winfield who was exploiting a kids’ market by only hiring investment managers who were not yet 30 years of age: “The strength of my kids is that they are too young to remember anything bad, and they are making so much money that they feel invincible. Now, you know, and I know, that one day the orchestra will stop playing and the wind will rattle through the broken window panes, and the anticipation of this freezes [the rest of] us” who are old enough to remember.

The market’s recent weakness and extraordinary volatility has been particularly hard on the current generation of “kids,” who are quickly becoming older and wiser. It is perhaps little solace to them today, but they are setting up the preconditions of the bull market’s next long-term move."

Summing Up

Individual savers should focus on their long term financial needs and the propensity of the stock market to rise when considering how to invest those savings for the long haul.

And over time stock returns beat other investment alternatives by a huge margin.

Although nobody knows with certainty what's going to happen to market prices today, next month, next year, or even the next decade, we all know how old we are.

We should save and invest based largely on the calendar.

For short term needs, keep some cash. For the long haul, invest in blue chip dividend paying stocks.

That's my take.

Thanks. Bob.

Growing Opposition to Individual Choice and Free Markets ... Value for Money ... The Role of Consumers, Government, Unions and 'Protection'

Free markets get a bad rap these days, as do most forms of capitalism.

That's a very bad omen for the future income growth and prosperity of today's typical and heavily indebted American families.

In large measure, that negativism toward markets is the result of individual ignorance, political malfeasance and protectionist measures on the part of government and union leaders around the world.

In even larger measure, however, it's the result of growing globalization and competition for the consumers' dollars.

What's at stake is the 'value for money' market exchange system which works best in a free choice consumer driven society.

Consumers' decisions ultimately determine where capital and labor 'go' explains the power of consumer choice and free markets:

"Insofar as an economy is market-oriented, the ultimate determinant of “where money goes”—that is, of where resources, including labor, go; where the course of productive activity goes; where financing goes—is the detail in the pattern of consumer spending (including consumers’ decisions on how much, how long, and in which specific forms, to save). . . .

Consumers’ decisions ultimately determine where capital and labor ‘go’ and what their values are in alternative uses. If you’re skeptical and are in search of some evidence in support of this claim, consider that protectionism in nearly all of its forms and guises is a direct attempt to change the way consumers spend their money (in order, be aware, to give owners of capital a say that such owners would not otherwise have in determining the course of productive activities)."

Summing Up

Free markets work best for society, as individual consumers are in control.

We seem to have forgotten that simple fact and placed government and union 'leaders' in control instead of individuals.

That's a very big mistake and an ongoing expensive one as well.

Global competition isn't always fun, especially for losers, but it's always the best way to play.

That's my take.

Thanks. Bob.

Our ~2.5% Growing 'Stuck in the Mud' American Economy .... Three Factors That Weigh Most are (1) Weak Government, (2) Excessive Debt and (3) Global Competition

People are not optimistic about the current condition and long term outlook for the U.S. economy as it continues to grow slowly and good jobs remain hard to find.

Unfortunately, there are three solid reasons why that lack of optimism is not misplaced in our aging America, regardless of what the politicians may want us to believe.

1- Government spending and our dependence thereon has grown to be excessive, and a commitment to self reliance is largely missing.

2- Debt levels are out of control, and reckless spending by individuals and households is encouraged by government on such things as student loans and no skin-in-the-game low money down mortgages, both of which are guaranteed by taxpayers.

3- Competition for limited consumer dollars is severe and attributable to today's excessive and unbalanced manufacturing capacity (especially in China), excessive debt levels, slow growth, private sector underemployment, public sector overemployment, and low inflation global economy.

We enjoy buying low cost and high quality imported goods, especially on credit. Yet too many of us fail to realize that American made products must be able to compete effectively with products made in those low cost countries.

The Fed's Confusing Message About Interest Rate Increases offers these facts for our consideration:

"Economists always warn, correctly, not to make too much of any single economic report, but rather to analyze new information in terms of longer-term trends. . . .

 

Incoming data would have to be extraordinarily strong to signal the arrival of a sustainably healthy economy. So far – more than six years into an economic recovery – growth has been too modest and too uneven to repair the harm from the Great Recession.

 

The clearest evidence of deep and uncorrected damage is recent Census data which shows that in 2014, the median American household still had lower income, after inflation, than in 2007, before the recession. Specifically, median income in 2014, $53,657, was 6.5 percent below its level in 2007 and 7.2 percent below its level in 1999. Data on wages this year does not indicate any meaningful improvement in those dismal trends.

 

Even the news on Friday that the economy expanded at a strong annual pace of 3.9 percent in the second quarter does not portend an era of robust growth. A rebound had been expected in the second quarter because the first quarter was so very weak.

 

In addition, recent economic surveys indicate that growth slowed again in the third quarter; that optimism among business leaders is near lows last seen during the financial crisis; and that prices for goods and services are falling, a sign of weak demand. . . .

 

One worrisome sign is that the share of 25 to 34-year-olds with a job – a big factor in home buying – appears to have topped out in recent months.

 

Another bad omen is the recent sluggish pace of manufacturing growth. Even if home sales continue a general upward trend, the upswing is likely only to offset the softness in manufacturing, rather than bolstering growth overall. . . .

 

What’s missing is straight talk about the economy’s entrenched problems, and possible solutions."

 

Summing Up

Here's some straight talk:

1- An aging America has become too dependent on big spending government programs which invariably under-fund, over-promise and under-deliver.

2- An aging America has recklessly spent our way to unsustainable debt levels, both directly as individuals and indirectly through our local, state and federal governments, as well as agencies thereof.

3- As individual consumers we enjoy the low prices offered by low cost and high quality imported products, but we fail to recognize that our domestically based companies must be competitive with those companies and countries who offer these imported products. Cars, TVs, computers, other electronic goods, shoes and clothes are just a few examples that immediately come to mind.
 

It's going to be a long hard slog going forward as too little self reliance, too much government, too much debt and very real global competition will combine to make things even tougher.

 

That's my take.

 

Thanks. Bob.

Living the American Dream the Indian American Way ... A Three Part Formula for Success --- (1) Show Up, (2) Work Hard, and (3) Improve Continuously and Rapidly

Indian Americans outperform most other Americans in achieving both academic and business success.

First, they show up by migrating to these shores, aka entering the Land of Opportunity. Then they work hard at getting better each day. That's the simple formula, and it works.

In America we all begin as 'C' students. Some proceed to work hard and get 'A' grades. Meanwhile, most settle for 'C' grades. And, of course, some flunk or drop out.

Let's explore this American success formula of success through hard work. The only 'natural talent' we need is opportunity, and a set of goals that we are willing to work hard to accomplish. Living in America gives us that opportunity, and the hard work part is up to us.

Why So Many Indians Succeed in America is subtitled 'Talent and hard work tell only part of the story. It's also about opportunity.'

"Many people in India are proud of the successes of their 3.1 million kin who have immigrated to the U.S. But the hoopla about high-profile CEOs, Pulitzer Prize-winning novelists and precocious spelling bee champions often overlooks a simple truth.

The achievements of Indian-Americans don’t merely reflect individual effort and cultural values, such as respect for education. They are a living repudiation of the heavy-handed statism that kept India poor for decades and hampers its progress today.

Indian-born CEOs such as Microsoft's  Satya Nadella, Adobe Systems's Shantanu Narayen, PepsiCo's  Indra Nooyi and Google's  Sundar Pichai are household names back home. . . .

India’s interest in its diaspora goes beyond corporate America. NRI—which stands for “non-resident Indian”—is a popular term for an overseas Indian. Newspapers often run special sections dedicated to their latest activities. Indian-American characters will pop up in Bollywood movies . . . .

Indian-American spelling bee winners from obscure towns in the American Midwest find their pictures splashed across the front pages of Indian newspapers. . . .

Statistics suggest that Indians have thrived in America. They make up less than 1% of the country’s population but are estimated to have founded more than one in eight Silicon Valley startups. The community boasts two governors: Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal and South Carolina’s Nikki Haley.

According to the Pew Research Center, the median income for Indian-American families in 2010 was $88,000, nearly twice the national average. Seventy percent of Indian-Americans hold a bachelor’s degree or higher, compared to the national average of less than 30%.

While many Indians are familiar with the picture these figures paint—that Indian-Americans tend to be educated and wealthy—they don’t dwell upon the underlying circumstances. The Indian-American community owes its good fortune as much to America as to talent and hard work. Only in a country built on respect for merit, rule of law, individual rights and free enterprise could a young immigrant group—large-scale Indian immigration to the U.S. only began in the mid-1960s—prosper so quickly. . . .

Why did Ms. Nooyi, Messrs. Nadella and Pichai and other Indian-Americans seek their fortunes in America? Because socialist India, with its sky-high tax rates and meddling bureaucrats, offered little opportunity. . . .

For 50 years, America has acted as a magnet for Indian aspiration."

Summing Up

There you have it. And facts are stubborn things.

And the fact is that anybody can do what these Indian Americans have done --- and it can most easily be done in America.

That's because as Americans we're free to do what we want as long as we don't interfere with the rights of others to do likewise.

Playing the wrongheaded American 'victims and villains' game of blaming free enterprise and the private sector for whatever is wrong simply isn't in the Indian American playbook for success.

Their success formula instead is a simple three part story based on the idea of good old fashioned American Exceptionalism: (1) start by showing up and acting right; (2) then spend lots of time on task by working hard to achieve your self chosen dreams; and (3) develop the habit of continuous and rapid improvement in whatever it is that you have chosen to do.

Doesn't that sound a lot like what parents and coaches say are the worthwhile and important life lessons to be taught kids through participation in sports and other extracurricular activities?

If so, why don't we encourage that exact same mindset and work ethic when it comes to education and the workplace?

There's nothing in the water or the genes that determines success. It's mostly what's between our ears.

Success results from sustained effort and the ongoing measurement of progress toward accomplishing our chosen goals. If we can dream it, we can do it. But it's the doing that matters most.

That's my take.

Thanks. Bob.

Have We Given Up on Living the American Dream? ... Too Many Gen Xers (Young Americans in Their 30s and 40s) Have Resigned Themselves to a Lifetime of Debt and Government Dependence in Their Retirement Years ... That's Not Smart and Must Change

The FUD factor (fear, uncertainty and doubt) is unfortunately very much an integral part of living in present day America.


Have We the People thrown in the towel and given up on realizing the American dream for ourselves, our children and future Americans?


Have we decided to forfeit the belief in self reliance and instead decided to depend on government for such things as 'free' college, government provided health care and complete dependence on government determined Social Security benefits to meet nearly 100% of our income needs in retirement?


Well, it sure seems that way these days as the economy continues to struggle, and politicians of all stripes continue to avoid the real government dependence, economic, globally job related and educational issues. Meanwhile, we have become less competitive globally and are losing manufacturing jobs due to a weak global economy. And to top if off, debt levels are historically high, both for individuals and our nation as a whole.


For the job loss example du jour, see Caterpillar Cuts Jobs, Revenue Outlook which is subtitled 'Equipment maker projects 10,000 job cuts, revenue falling for record fourth-straight year.'


And as an integral part of this weakened economy and growing debt driven defeatist attitude in America contributing to less self reliance and increased government dependence, many of our younger Americans in their 30s and 40s have already given up on leading a responsible life financially. That has to change.


These Americans have yet to recover from the recession discusses these rather negative views of Gen Xers about saving and investing for the future:

"The Great Recession is officially over, but one group of Americans is struggling to leave it behind.

Members of Generation X, defined by most demographers as those born between 1965 and 1980 and now in their 30s and 40s, are carrying higher debt, “and appear to be remarkably complacent about its implications for their financial future,” a new survey by Allianz Life Insurance of 2,000 Gen Xers and baby boomers, born between 1946 and 1964 with a minimum household income of $30,000 a year. . . .

The recession came at a bad time for Gen X respondents, who said they feel more hopeless about their ability to achieve retirement goals and about their overall financial situation . . . .


Although each generation feels their circumstances have been tougher to manage, more than two thirds (67%) of Gen Xers agreed with the idea that suggested targets for how much is needed to retire are way out of reach versus less than half of baby boomers (49%).

As a result, members of Generation X have become accustomed to their debt. “More Gen Xers are seeing debt as a necessary way of life,” the study concluded. Around 20% of that group believes that going into debt to handle day-to-day purchases is “just a fact of life” versus only 14% of boomers. When asked which financial philosophy they preferred, half of Generation X members surveyed said “enjoy and live for today” versus only 39% of baby boomers, with the majority of baby boomers (61%) choosing “save and plan for tomorrow.”

One major reason for the difference? The housing bubble. Rising home prices helped build wealth for those who bought homes before the year 2000. But in the mid-2000s, at the height of property bubble, many in Generation X bought their first home just in time for the collapse of that market ....

Bottom line: “Living with debt has become a way of life for both Generation X and baby boomers as the stigma of owing money is gradually disappearing,” the researchers found. Nearly half (48%) of both generations agree that credit cards now function as a survival tool.

But Gen Xers reported carrying 82% more nonmortgage debt (student loans and credit cards) than baby boomers. . . . (Of course, millennials are also more likely to have more student debt than their older cohorts.)

But Generation X and baby boomers agree on one thing: An overwhelming number of both boomers and Generation X — 84% and 92%, respectively — agree there is a retirement crisis and both groups reported being heavily impacted by the 2008 crash. (Millennnials were in high school or college, or just starting their careers during the economic crisis, and obviously have more time to save for retirement.) And Generation X and boomers surveyed also agree that it’s been much harder for Generation X to keep a job or plan for retirement.

More than 84% from both generations said they feel that a retirement starting at age 65 spent “doing exactly what you want” is now unrealistic."

Summing Up

It's tough out there for too many Americans these days, and especially for those in their 30s and 40s.

Individual debt burdens are excessive and the young among us believe that they have no realistic chance of liquidating those debts anytime soon, if ever.

But it's definitely not a smart thing for us to give up on a life of financial self reliance and instead opt to rely completely on Social Security and other government entitlement programs.


To repeat, choosing to place our financial future in the hands of government 'leaders' while we 'live only for today' and take on excessive individual debt burdens are definitely not smart moves.


If We the People will take the time to talk to each other, stick together, work hard, believe in the possibility of both a solid and inexpensive education, and plan for the future while living in the present, together we'll achieve the American dream.


And in time this current period of FUD factor related gloom and doom shall prove to have been a painful but passing thing.


That's my take.

Thanks. Bob.

Self Government and Education .... Knowledge Is the Great Equalizer ... Educational Differences are the Biggest Contributors to Income Inequality

A well informed and knowledgeable citizenry are the foundational underpinnings of a healthy and well functioning democracy. And since We the People are in charge, it's incumbent on us to be able to make informed governance choices on behalf of ourselves and future generations of Americans.

Accordingly, my long held view is that widespread societal knowledge is so critical to the self governing process that delegating American educational outcomes to the sole or even primary control of the government paid educators is a huge and ongoing mistake.

One constant reminder from our 'leaders' is that greater income equality is an American goal. Yet we are NOT constantly reminded by those same 'leaders' that reaching that goal will only result from the attainment of more equal educational outcomes. Income levels and educational achievement very much go together. Their attainment is mutually supportive.

So what do we need to do to make that goal America's future reality?

Is making college free the answer? No, it's not.

Then how about school vouchers and giving parents and their kids the freedom to choose how to pursue their own version of educational excellence? That gets my vote. How about you?

Education Gap Between Rich and Poor Is Growing Wider offers a discouraging outlook on all this and reports that the biggest challenges confronting American education now involve economic disparities as opposed to racial differences:

"The wounds of segregation were still raw in the 1970s. With only rare exceptions, African-American children had nowhere near the same educational opportunities as whites.

The civil rights movement, school desegregation and the War on Poverty helped bring a measure of equity to the playing field. Today, despite some setbacks along the way, racial disparities in education have narrowed significantly. By 2012, the test-score deficit of black 9-, 13- and 17-year-olds in reading and math had been reduced as much as 50 percent compared with what it was 30 to 40 years before.

Achievements like these breathe hope into our belief in the Land of Opportunity. They build trust in education as a leveling force powering economic mobility. . . .

 

For all the progress in improving educational outcomes among African-American children, the achievement gaps between more affluent and less privileged children is wider than ever .... Racial disparities are still a stain on American society, but they are no longer the main divider. Today the biggest threat to the American dream is class.
........................................................................................................

 {NOTE: The challenges facing American companies and workers today are global in nature. Accordingly, the right to receive a solid education is more important than ever.

Working hard to level the playing field for all Americans is a fundamental prerequisite of a free and fair society, and its attainment requires the active support, involvement and ongoing encouragement of all concerned Americans.

Our governing authorities, educators and parents all talk a good game, but We the People need to insist that the required remedial action steps are taken to convert that talk into action.

In other words, we must behave in a smart, hard and together way.

Vouchers are a big part of the answer.

Only then will we win the global game.}

...........................................................................................................

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
Education is today more critical than ever. College has become virtually a precondition for upward mobility. Men with only a high school diploma earn about a fifth less than they did 35 years ago. The gap between the earnings of students with a college degree and those without one is bigger than ever. 

And yet American higher education is increasingly the preserve of the elite. The sons and daughters of college-educated parents are more than twice as likely to go to college as the children of high school graduates and seven times as likely as those of high school dropouts. . . .

 

The problem, of course, doesn't start in college. . . .

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

A new book titled “Too Many Children Left Behind” . . . traces the story of America’s educational disparities across the life cycle of its children, from the day they enter kindergarten to eighth grade.

Their story goes sour very early, and it gets worse as it goes along. On the day they start kindergarten, children from families of low socioeconomic status are already more than a year behind the children of college graduates in their grasp of both reading and math.

And despite the efforts deployed by the American public education system, nine years later the achievement gap, on average, will have widened by somewhere from one-half to two-thirds.

Even the best performers from disadvantaged backgrounds, who enter kindergarten reading as well as the smartest rich kids, fall behind over the course of their schooling.

The challenges such children face compared to their more fortunate peers are enormous. Children from low socioeconomic backgrounds are seven times more likely to have been born to a teenage mother. Only half live with both parents, compared with 83 percent of the children of college graduates. . . .

When they enter the public education system, they are shortchanged again. . . .

This is arguably education’s biggest problem. Narrowing proficiency gaps that emerge way before college would probably do more to increase the nation’s college graduation rate than offering universal community college, easier terms on student loans or more financial aid.

If we could equalize achievement from age zero to 14, that would go a long way toward closing the college enrollment and completion gaps. . . .

 

Fifty years ago, the black-white proficiency gap was one and a half to two times as large as the gap between a child from a family at the top 90th percentile of the income distribution and a child from a family at the 10th percentile, according to Professor Reardon at Stanford. Today, the proficiency gap between the poor and the rich is nearly twice as large as that between black and white children.

In other words, even as one achievement gap narrowed, another opened wide. That kind of progress could dash one’s hope in the leveling power of education."

 

Summing Up

In a well functioning self governing democracy, getting a solid education is the responsibility of everyone.

Educational differences are the greatest contributors to income inequality among Americans.

Our educational rankings and outcomes are falling farther behind each year when compared to other countries.

One cold, hard and cruel fact of life in today's America is that we don't value education as much as we should and must.

And another cold, hard and cruel fact of life in today's America is that we too often abdicate our role as parents and citizens to the 'leaders' of an ineffective and government run school system.

By the time the typical American child has reached the age of 14, the educational differences between a poor child and an affluent child are going to impact each of them quite differently for the rest of their lives.

We don't need to hear all the happy political campaign talk about free college.

Instead we need to talk about equalizing the educational opportunities of all American children, beginning at birth and continuing right through their teenage years and beyond.

But that's not something that the teachers unions, the politicians or far too many of our nation's parents want to discuss.

How we will change that, I know not, but I do know that for the sake of future generations and the well being of America, change it we must.

That's my take.

Thanks. Bob.

Yogi's Life Story Has Lessons for All

The Extraordinary Journey of Yogi Berra is subtitled 'In 90 years, the Yankee legend lived many lives: war veteran, humorist, manager and baseball's greatest catcher.' It says this in part:
        

"He was a spectacular baseball player. That sometimes gets forgotten in all the folksy warmth surrounding Yogi Berra, who died Tuesday at age 90. The numbers are staggering, almost supernatural, something out of a comic book: 18 seasons as a catcher for the New York Yankees, 10 World Series rings, 14 Series appearances, 15 All-Star Games and three most valuable player awards.

There’s never been a career like it, before or since. . . .

Statistics tell only a fraction of his story. Berra was the son of immigrants, a World War II veteran who had left a Yankees farm club to join the Navy and served at D-Day, a gunner’s mate on a landing craft support vessel. “I think his military service has been a little overlooked, because men like him really didn’t talk about it much,” Carmen Berra, Yogi’s wife of 65 years, told the Star-Ledger a year before her death in 2014. “It wasn’t a big thing to him…it was just what they had to do."              

Such humility defined his life. Yogi Berra was not a pretentious man. His exceptional talent didn’t yield the type of payday that is now customary for ballplayers today—Berra never made more than $65,000 in a season, and never had more than a one-year contract. His easygoing style and proclivity for malapropisms—actually, it’s not fair to call them malapropisms; they’re Yogi-isms, sui generis, many of them brilliant (“Baseball is 90 percent mental. The other half is physical,” not even Twain was that good)—made him a beloved figure even to those who hated the mighty Yankees. Berra returned the laughs with a twinkle of self-awareness: Yogi made people chuckle, but he always got to be in on the joke."

Summing Up

Yes, Yogi was the greatest catcher of all time.

He was also a World War II hero who served at D-Day.

And a very funny and humble person as well.

They don't make 'em like him anymore.

That's my take.

Thanks. Bob.

Burdensome Debt and a Lack of Adequate Savings and Investments Don't Combine for an Enjoyable Retirement .... What Yogi Tried to Teach Us

Yogi Berra has died at age 90. See Baseball Legend Yogi Berra Dies.

Among other things, Yogi taught us that we can 'observe a lot just by watching' and that 'it ain't over 'til it's over.'

We've become a nation of debtors. Burdensome personal indebtedness is a well established American way of life and a bad habit. Those simple facts are easily observed just by watching, and yet life ain't  over 'til it's over.

As a result, we clearly are neither a nation of savers nor individual investors. Those are also easily seen well established facts and bad American habits.

People who fail to save and invest those savings adequately during their working years will fail to fully and comfortably enjoy their retirement years.

That simple common sense based fact is discussed in The simple reason you'll probably never retire comfortably:

"America: At the rate you’re going, you may never get to ditch your 9-to-5 job.

In the past year alone, 15% of Americans dipped into their retirement fund to pay for an emergency, according to a nationally representative survey of more than 1,000 adults in the U.S. by personal finance site Bankrate.com released Wednesday — that’s 30 million Americans, if you extrapolate the survey data onto the entire U.S. population.

Other studies reveal a similar predilection towards tapping into the retirement well too soon. Nearly one in four workers ages 20 to 60 have either taken a loan or early withdrawal from their retirement fund, according to the 16th annual Transamerica Retirement Survey of Workers, released in May. . . .

“Americans are woefully under-saved for emergencies — and lacking that cushion, they far too often resort to [tapping] their retirement accounts,” says Greg McBride, the chief financial analyst for Bankrate.com. . . .

It’s older people who are most likely to tap into their retirement savings for emergencies. McBride says that this may have to do with higher medical bills or persistent underemployment, among other reasons, but that whatever the reason, it’s “particularly troubling.”. . .

These ill-advised, costly money moves are further exacerbated by the fact that Americans are already vastly under-saved for retirement. Only about two in three workers have saved any money for retirement, according to a 2015 report from the Employee Benefit Research Institute.

And of those that have saved, for some, the amounts are paltry: Just 14% of American households say the value of their savings and investments (minus their primary home value) are more than $250,000 — and experts say most households will need more than $1 million to retire comfortably.

(Incidentally, just 10% of workers think they’ll need more than $1 million to retire comfortably, according to EBRI.)

Most workers don’t have enough money to retire
Total savings and investments, 2015
Less than $1,000	28%
$1,000 - $9,999	17%
$10,000 - $24,999	12%
$25,000 - $49,999	9%
$50,000 - $99,999	10%
$100,000 - $249,999	10%
$250,000 or more	14%
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute

Summing Up

When Yogi Berra's wife once asked him where he wanted to be buried, he said in response, "I don't know. Why don't you surprise me?" That's a classic 'Yogi-ism.'

For those of us who came of age in the 1950s and 1960s, we'll miss Yogi the player. And all Americans, young and old alike, will remember his classic sayings about life.

But for those of us still living in the here and now, the retirement stats clearly reveal that 57% of workers have less than $25,000 in savings and investments. Hall of Fame savers and investors we're not.

Accordingly, the tendency to embrace socialism is very much alive and well in America.

If not based on ideology, widespread socialism has become a matter of necessity, if nothing else. 

Personal habits are hard to change, and our poor habits regarding failing to save and invest adequately for our future financial needs are now long in place and well established.

And they're very selfish habits as well.

That's my take. 

Thanks. Bob. 

Question for the Pope

The Argentinian raised Pope Francis is visiting America after first spending some time in Cuba.

He's very concerned about income inequality and the plight of the poor --- as are we all.

He's also quite critical of capitalism and the results of unfettered free market competition --- but I'm not.

Here's the tongue-firmly-in-cheek question I'd like for him to answer: IF SOCIALISM IS AWESOME AND CAPITALISM IS EVIL, SHOULD WE STOP ACCEPTING REFUGEES FROM SOCIALIST COUNTRIES BECAUSE THEIR LIFE WOULD BE BETTER OVER THERE?

My vote goes to capitalism, private property, individual freedoms. and the virtues of competing to get and keep customers --- who are free to choose whether and from whom to buy.

And that very much includes the freedom to fail while competing, thus leading to later success.

Socialism hurts the poor. Maybe the Pope saw that in Cuba.

Cuba and other communist countries also prohibit free speech. Maybe he saw that in Cuba as well.

If not, he should have.

Capitalism and free markets have made America the most prosperous nation in the history of the world.

In fact, our poor are extremely rich by Cuba's and Argentina's standards. And for that matter, China's and Russia's as well. 

In America we have lots to learn and miles to go before we sleep.

But we have lots to teach as well --- and that very much includes what the Pope could learn by 'seeing' what there is to be easily seen while he's here.

That's my take.

Thanks. Bob.

Pension Plans for Teachers Aren't Fair to Those Teachers Who Won't Spend Decades in the Classroom .... 401(k) Plans Are Much Better

If you know any young teachers, ask them this question --- do they know their pension plan's vesting period?

Do they even know what vesting means? And if they do, is it a plan with cliff vesting? And if so, how long before the vesting occurs? {Hint: it's probably five to ten years.}

Then ask them this --- do they know how the pension benefits under the plan are calculated? {Hint: it's probably based on a combination of (1) their years of credited service up to a maximum (perhaps thirty years) and (2) their final average pay as measured by the average pay during the final five years or so of teaching.}

What this means in simple language is that young teachers pay into the system from day one but don't get anything from the system unless they have worked long enough for the pension benefit to vest, and that's usually after a period of five or more years, depending on the plan.

And even if they do manage to 'earn' a vested and 'deferred' benefit payable at age fifty five or later, they probably won't receive much of a pension unless they remain as teachers under the system for twenty to thirty years. And that's the way that pension plans for teachers take advantage of the young, courtesy of the teachers unions and school districts that determine what the negotiated plan benefits will be.

In other words, nearly all the dollars that go into the system are paid disproportionately to 'lifers' and not equitably to all plan participants, especially those who exit teaching or the relevant local system after a few years.

We are hearing lots these days about school districts and unaffordable pension plans for teachers. And for government run schools from Pennsylvania to Chicago to Seattle, the financial burdens on taxpayers have become huge. Yet we don't hear about how pensions for teachers are unfair to young teachers who won't spend their careers in the classroom.

In fact, there's a simple, effective, fair and affordable fix waiting in the wings -- 401(k) plans. These 'defined contribution' plans have become quite common in the private sector, and they are better than pension plans for the typical employee.

You see, 401(k) plans are portable and therefore better for those who don't spend a lifetime at the same job, whereas pension plans work to the advantage of 'lifers' who start early and stay until they are fully vested. But most teachers aren't 'lifers.'

How Young Teachers Pay for Those Who Won't Budge is subtitled 'New, more mobile teachers are being exploited by lifers who refuse to reform unaffordable pensions:'

"As America’s young and freshly hired teachers excitedly begin a new school year, it’s a good bet that most are unaware that the financial deck is stacked against them. How so? They are paying for the pension benefits enjoyed by retired and retiring colleagues—benefits that most of them will never see.

The pension plans in most public schools are structured to favor the small minority who teach in a single system for a working lifetime, at the expense of the vast majority who leave the system much earlier in their careers. These plans are not equitable and may discourage talented young people from choosing to teach in public schools.

About 91% of public-school teachers are enrolled in defined-benefit plans that base retirement income on a percentage of average salary during the last few years of employment. . . . What can’t be argued is that states are able to fund pensions for lifers by redirecting money that was not paid out to those who exited the system earlier.

Under current plan structures, teachers accrue almost no retirement wealth in their first several years—then accrue substantially more as they near retirement age. . . .

The Pennsylvania Public School Retirement System’s actuaries expect that about 80% of teachers will leave the system before their pension benefit is worth a single dollar. And according to a report last year from Bellwether Education Partners, more than half of all public-school teachers nationally will exit their school systems before their pensions vest.

This pension structure disadvantages teachers who leave education for another profession and those who move to another state in mid-career. Economists Robert Costrell (University of Arkansas) and Michael Podgursky (University of Missouri) have calculated that compared with a teacher who works within a single state for 30 years, a teacher who splits that same time across two systems accrues less than half the pension wealth.

Moreover, a Bellwether report in July showed that pension cuts in response to the Great Recession fell almost entirely on the backs of newly hired and future teachers. This is in part because courts have interpreted state laws as prohibiting any reductions in the pensions that current or retired public employees were promised. So instead pension benefits for future teachers have been cut, and the number of years before their pensions vest has been increased.

No one becomes a teacher to get rich. But today’s pension plans discourage talented young people from entering the classroom. Several reforms can help fix this problem. . . .

Young teachers also would be better off if states based accrued rights to defined-benefit pensions on a fixed percentage of yearly salary, instead of being heavily backloaded. States also could adopt defined-contribution structures similar to the 401(k)-type plans that most private employees (have) . . . .

No such changes are likely unless younger teachers become aware of how they are being exploited by their retirement plans. Their union representatives have no interest in making this point clear and will be unlikely to buck the lifers to change the system. But public-school reformers ought to fight on behalf of the new generation of teachers."

Summing Up

Contrary to popular belief and misconception, the great majority of teachers would be better served by a 401(k) defined contribution plan rather than a defined benefit pension plan.

The pieces of the pie aren't fairly apportioned, as the lifers get a windfall at the expense of the youngsters and those teachers who leave the local system after a few years.

And since they are forced to pay into the system from day one, their benefits shouldn't be forfeited when they exit the system for whatever reason. Instead they should vest from day one.

And if and when they decide to leave the system, they should be able to take their 'portable' and 'earned' account balance with them.

It's only fair, but it's hardly understood, and it's never explained.

That's my take.

Thanks. Bob.

As China's President Xi Visits America, Our Unique Democratic System Which Protects Private Property Rights, Individual Freedoms and Capitalism Is Under Attack ... Just Like Always

Communism, Socialism, Totalitarianism and Confucianism are among the many 'isms' competing against the American ideals of individual freedom, private property, capitalism and democratic self government.

The fight to preserve our individual freedoms will never be over for We the People. In fact, Russia, China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria and Venezuela are just a few of the countries that stand in direct opposition to our unique American constitutional system of self government which is by, for and of We the People. It's been that way for a very long time and isn't likely to change anytime soon.

Why China Is Turning Back to Confucius is subtitled 'President Xi Jinping, set to arrive in U.S. Tuesday, is promoting traditions his party once reviled.' It says this in part:

"One Thursday morning in June, 200 senior officials crammed into an auditorium in the Communist Party’s top training academy to study a revolutionary idea at the heart of President Xi Jinping’s vision for China. . . .

Two years after outlining a “China Dream” to re-establish his nation as a great world power, Mr. Xi is backfilling his vision and seeking a fresh source of legitimacy by reinventing the party as inheritor and savior of a 5,000-year-old civilization.

The shift forms the backdrop for Mr. Xi’s visit to the U.S. this week and could shape China for years.

Mr. Xi appears to be seeking to inoculate Chinese people against the spread of Western political ideals of individual freedom and democracy, part of what some political insiders say he views as a long-term contest of values and ideology with the U.S.

The effort is gaining urgency now, as an economic slowdown and stock-market rout fray the social compact of the last three decades in which citizens traded political freedom for rapid wealth creation. With Communist dogma and Chinese-style capitalism losing appeal, the party needs fresh ideas."

Now let's consider briefly other recent relevant history before peeking into the future for individual freedoms, democracy and the American way.

In 1956 Soviet Nikita Khrushchev said to America, "We will bury you." He was wrong about that.

Thirty three years later in 1989 the Berlin Wall fell. We thought freedom and democracy had won forever as the example for the rest of the world to follow, which they assuredly would. We were wrong about that.

The world's a mess today, of course, and what's going to happen down the road is, as it always has been and probably always will be, an absolute unknown.

After reading Are Western Values Losing Their Sway?, I wanted to share it in these troubled and tumultuous times:

"THE West is suddenly suffused with self-doubt.

 

Centuries of superiority and global influence appeared to reach a new summit with the collapse of the Soviet Union, as the countries, values and civilization of the West appeared to have won the dark, difficult battle with Communism.

 

That victory seemed especially sweet after the turn of China toward capitalism, which many thought presaged a slow evolution to middle-class demands for individual rights and transparent justice — toward a form of democracy. But is the embrace of Western values inevitable? Are Western values, essentially Judeo-Christian ones, truly universal?

 

The history of the last decade is a bracing antidote to such easy thinking. The rise of authoritarian capitalism has been a blow to assumptions, made popular by Francis Fukuyama, that liberal democracy has proved to be the most reliable and lasting political system.

 

With the collapse of Communism, “what we may be witnessing,” Mr. Fukuyama wrote hopefully in 1989, “is the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.”

 

But couple the tightening of Chinese authoritarianism with Russia’s turn toward revanchism and dictatorship, and then add the rise of radical Islam, and the grand victory of Western liberalism can seem hollow, its values under threat even within its own societies.

 

The recent flood of migrants and Syrian asylum seekers were welcomed in much of Europe, especially Germany and Austria. But it also prompted criticism from a number of less prosperous European countries, a backlash from the far right and new anxieties about the growing influence of Islam, and radical Islamists, in Europe.

 

“Nineteen-eighty-nine was perceived as the victory of universalism, the end of history, but for all the others in the world it wasn’t a post-Cold War world but a post-colonial one,” said Ivan Krastev, director of the Center for Liberal Strategies in Sofia, Bulgaria . . . .

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

 

The fight over values is not limited to democracy. “We think the world is divided by individualism and democracy, but it’s the sexual divide,” Mr. Krastev said — with radical disagreements over the proper place of women and the rights of homosexuals.

 

In its rejection of Western liberal values of sexual equality and choice, conservative Russia finds common cause with many in Africa and with the religious teachings of Islam, the Vatican, fundamentalist Protestants and Orthodox Jews.

 

Extreme interpretations of religion, especially in areas of great instability and insecurity, can be a comforting or inspiring response to the confusions of modern life, and can soon become an enemy to religious freedom and tolerance for others, notes Robert Cooper. A British diplomat who helped build a European foreign policy in Brussels, he defined the problem of failed and postmodern states in his book “The Breaking of Nations.”

 

A quick look at anthropology shows us that “what we consider universal values are not so universal,” he said.

 

For instance, “We talk about democracy as a universal value,” Mr. Cooper said, “but when was it exactly that women in Italy got the vote? And blacks in the American South? So we have pretty shallow standards for this.” (In Italy it was 1945; one could argue that voting was not unrestricted in the United States until 1965.)

 

Given the choice, “nearly everyone in the world would like to live in our societies, because they can live better and don’t have to lie all the time,” he said. “So perhaps it’s wrong to talk of universal values. But the society they deliver is universally attractive.”. . .

The essence of democracy . . . is popular sovereignty, implying political and social equality. Easier said than done, given the tendency of governments and elites to presume they speak for the inarticulate masses. . . .

That is a caution echoed recently by William J. Burns, head of the Carnegie Endowment and a former deputy secretary of state. The debate, he argues, is really about the meaning of individual rights in non-Western states, even those considered democracies, and the “authenticity” of inherited values.

 

“Our own preachiness and lecturing tendencies sometimes get in the way, but there is a core to more open democratic systems that has an enduring appeal,” he said. That core is “the broad notion of human rights, that people have the right to participate in political and economic decisions that matter to them, and the rule of law to institutionalize those rights.”

 

The result “doesn’t have to look like Washington, which may be for the good,” Mr. Burns said. “But a respect for law and pluralism creates more flexible societies, because otherwise it’s hard to hold together multiethnic, multireligious societies.”

 

That’s what the Arab world will be wrestling with for a long time as old state systems crumble, he added.

 

These pressures are visible in Western societies, too. “Even in what are seemingly modern societies we see the tension, the core appeal of nationalism,” he said, as well as the attraction of religious radicalism to minorities who feel shut out of the mainstream of identity politics.

 

Yet democracies in whatever form seem more capable of coping with shifting pressures than authoritarian governments. History does not move laterally but in many different directions at once, Mr. Burns said. “Stability is not a static phenomenon.”"

 

Summing Up

The universality of human rights, freedom of choice, religious tolerance, free speech and the right to make our own way are among the hallmarks of our American society.

However, they aren't always practiced. In fact, sometimes We the People behave as if we have forgotten these fundamental truisms.

Although we have countless imperfections both as individuals and as a nation, let's keep working to improve.

That continuing self improvement program is what has long made America the greatest place on earth.

So let's keep working hard, individually and together, to make the greatest nation in the history of the world even greater.

Our kids and grandkids are depending on us to do just that.

That's enough incentive for me. How about you?

Thanks. Bob.

Happy Belated Birthday U.S. Government

On September 17, 1787, 42 of the 55 delegates to the the Constitutional Convention met to complete the last order of business - signing the Constitution.  The date has been called our government’s birthday (not to be confused with our country’s birthday).

In honor of that day and instead of cake, take the short quiz below and test your knowledge:

Self-Reliance, Grit, Success and the Future Self ... Living the American Dream by Continually Going to 'School,' First as a Student and Then as a College Graduate

Why do some kids enter college unprepared to do the work academically and yet still graduate?

And why do some other kids enter college prepared to do the work academically and yet don't graduate?

What is the recipe for success in life, both in college and beyond? And what does an essay by Ralph Waldo Emerson titled 'Self-Reliance' and published in 1841 have to teach us about all this?

In my view, success is achieved in any endeavor by following really simple stuff --- grit, persistent hard work, being passionate about reaching our goals (whatever they may be), and resolute self determination.

These habits have more to do with making 'C' students into 'A' students than other single factor. And let's be clear about one thing --- we all begin as 'C' students.

When coupled with a "if you can dream it, you can do it approach," living the American dream is very much in reach of every young American. But first our young dreamer needs to develop both grit and a work plan to become that 'future self.'

The Most Important Factor in a College Student's Success should be required reading for Americans of all ages, including students, parents and educators:

"All around the country right now, college students are moving into dorm rooms and beginning classes for the new academic year—but a distressingly high proportion of these students will not make it all the way through to get their degree.

Though the number of Americans enrolling in college continues to grow, graduation rates remain distressingly low. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, just 59% of full-time students seeking a bachelor’s degree in 2006 had graduated by 2012.

We worked . . . on a study pointing to a new way of identifying students who are most likely to drop out. . . .

The new analysis found that “mind-set”—a student’s sense of social belonging or grit, for example—is a stronger predictor of whether a student is likely to graduate than previously believed. So powerful, in fact, that it counts even more than external factors like standardized test scores, income levels and whether the student’s parents are college graduates.

In other words, the most important factor in a student’s success is malleable. Income and whether or not your parents went to college can’t be changed. But how someone engages with their work and institutions can.

This research has significant implications on efforts to prevent dropouts and boost graduation rates. It’s also timely. A decade ago, the U.S. ranked seventh globally in educational attainment—that is, years of formal schooling completed—among young adults. It has since fallen to 14th. With an economy increasingly dependent on an educated workforce, we simply can’t afford to continue this slide.

Our study, which surveyed more than 3,500 students, dug deeper into the underlying reasons for why students drop out. A fifth of those surveyed that did not complete their degree cited an inability to afford tuition as the primary cause. And a fourth cited conflicting commitments to a job or family.

But the researchers also discovered that more than 50% of the likelihood that a given student drops out is related to mind-set.

An essential mind-set characteristic is grit, which basically means the willingness to work hard for an extended period in search of a long-term goal. Most problems can be overcome with effort. Talent alone is insufficient for success. Grit measures the ability to continue to persevere day in, day out and power through distractions and failures.

A different body of research from Angela Lee Duckworth at the University of Pennsylvania tracked thousands of Chicago public school juniors and found that grit levels were directly tied to graduation rates, even controlling for family circumstances, standardized test scores and individual intelligence.

Likewise, a student’s sense of belonging at their institution is a strong predictor of their eventual success–stronger, in fact, than conventionally accepted factors like high-school G.P.A. or whether a student’s parents went to college. The first semester of school can be intensely isolating, particularly for low-income, minority and first-generation college students who may have fewer immediate social or emotional supports to help them through the process of planting roots in a new community.

A growing number of intervention programs that aim to improve student mind-sets are dramatically boosting graduation rates and demonstrating how we can close achievement gaps—and at surprisingly low costs. . . .

This new body of thinking reveals an important truth about improving college graduation rates: Students might not be able to influence the structural barriers that stand in their way, but they can alter their mind-sets. And by cultivating specific frames of mind, educators can empower students—particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds—to withstand the inevitable difficulties of postsecondary education and earn the reward that can transform their future: a college degree."

Summing Up

What matters most in life is not what happens to us, but rather how we react to those happenings.  Although we can't always control external events, we can always control our reactions and emotions to those events. We can choose to live our lives on our own terms.

Practicing self control, keeping our eyes on the prize, and believing in ourselves and our capabilities aren't new concepts.

But these common sense based teachings aren't being followed nearly enough in today's 'victims' and 'villains' world.

This perceived modern 'victims' and 'villains' world of dumbing down everything and giving everybody an 'A' or passing grade in whatever it is that is being graded is harmful to all Americans, and especially the poor.

Keenan mentioned Emerson's 1841 essay on 'Self-Reliance' in his latest post, and that essay is very much worth reading in its entirety. It is easily accessed by 'googling' or 'binging' and then taking the brief time required to read it. Emerson's timeless and common sense essay is full of life lessons for all, including teachers, parents, students and taxpayers.

That's my take.

Thanks. Bob.

Ralph Waldo Emerson and The Baltimore Ravens

Bob introduced us to NFL player Ryan Broyles in his post yesterday.  I'll continue the NFL theme today by sharing the story of John Urschel, who might just might be the reincarnated personage of Ralph Waldo Emerson,  the philosopher and essayist who is the author of Self Reliance.

I think you'll agree that his story is at least as impressive as Mr. Broyles.  But, you may also come away completely blown away like I was.

Now that I've set the expectation level, take a look below at the Baltimore Sun article about Mr. Urschel:

....................

John Urschel found himself in a nightmare, thrust there by a young fan's simple question. 

What would Urschel do, the student at Glenridge Elementary in Landover Hills asked, if he lived in a world where he could pursue neither football nor math? 

"I was at a loss," said the second-year Ravens offensive lineman. "This sounds like some hell they've sent me to, some terrible place. … It hurt me and cut me as a person to even think about this alternate universe in which that was a thing. I couldn't do it, man." 

Urschel, 24, isn't joking. For as long as he can remember, he has thrown his body around a football field or lost his mind in the elegant constructs of higher mathematics. Save for playing chess or his Fender Strat guitar, he's never cared to make room for much else. 

That's why he's spent this offseason and time away from the playing field as a math ambassador, talking with young students around Maryland about the importance of math and where it could lead them. At the same time, he's trying to become the best football player he can be. 

This juxtaposition of the physical and intellectual has led to some portrayals of Urschel as the ultimate "mathlete." But the 308-pound future Ph.D. is a serious person who aims to find purpose in every moment of his day. 

Since he completed his rookie season with the Ravens, Urschel has found a level of popularity unheard of for a reserve offensive guard and center. 

He's been interviewed by Rolling Stone, the New York Times and National Public Radio. 

He shared his insights on simplifying complex data with the National Security Agency. 

Forbes.com gave him space to explain, in something approaching plain English, his paper, "A Cascadic Multigrid Algorithm for Computing the Fiedler Vector of Graph Laplacians." 

Urschel doesn't run from his identity as the baddest nerd in the land. If that were his goal, he would not sport the Twitter handle, @MathMeetsFball. And he wouldn't write a column for The Player's Tribune, an online publication founded by former baseball great Derek Jeter. 

In his debut piece, he analyzed the academic majors pursued by Division I football players and found they were just as irregular at academic powerhouse Stanford as at football powerhouse Auburn. 

When linebacker Chris Borland retired this spring from the San Francisco 49ers at 24 rather than subject himself to injury, Urschel wrote about why he continues to risk his brain by playing football. 

His mother has asked if he's ready to stop after every season, going back to his high school days in Buffalo. "This is not the life she wanted for me," he wrote. 

But he feels called to the field.  

"There's a rush you get when you go out on the field, lay everything on the line and physically dominate the player across from you," he wrote. "This is a feeling I'm (for lack of a better word) addicted to, and I'm hard-pressed to find anywhere else." 

Despite sharing himself with the world in this way, Urschel considers himself an odd candidate for fame. 

He drives a used Nissan Versa hatchback — a strong candidate for the humblest vehicle in the Ravens' parking lot — and lives on less than $25,000 a year to help save money even though his rookie contract was a four-year, $2.364 million deal. He took on a roommate last year to mitigate the cost of the home he leased during the season. 

"I'm very much a hermit. I do my football. I do my math, and I like to keep to myself," he says. "As social as I'll get on the weekends is probably doing some math in Starbucks with other people." 

But Urschel grasps a few basic realities: Though he loves math just as fervently as football, few kids share his passion for the subject. Because he plays in the most popular sports league in the country, young people are apt to listen to him. 

"I don't think that's fair, but that's the way it is," he says. "Kids look up to pro football players. They don't really look up to the world's top quantum physicists. … It's the world we live in. I might as well make use of this opportunity I have while I have it." 

So a math ambassador he shall be and he's proud of it. It's why he recently spent a morning with students in Prince George's County as part of a Discovery Education event, telling them the joys of math and science. 

It's why, a few days after the civil unrest over Freddie Gray's death, Urschel found himself with a crowd of emotionally roiling students at Douglass High School in West Baltimore. 

They refused to quiet for former Ravens star Ray Lewis or team executive Harry Swayne. But after a school official settled the room, Urschel calmly took the microphone and began his story. He held the students' attention. 

"I've never considered myself a very good public speaker," he says. "I think the reason, the sole reason, I succeed is whenever I go somewhere and I'm talking to people, I have a purpose. If you put me in a room full of high school kids, and I have no purpose in mind, I'll be that kid in the corner. But you give me some purpose, let me try to convey something to them, then I'm focused. I'm driven to that goal, and I'm precise."

Good role models 

He often speaks about his mother, Venita Parker, and the sacrifices she made to give him opportunities in math and football. As a single mother (Urschel's parents separated when he was 3) she coached his soccer teams, attended every school play and viola recital and made snacks for parent-teacher association meetings, all while balancing a career as an attorney. 

Urschel, in turn, was an unusually self-directed child who inhaled math from an early age. He earned his allowance by correctly calculating the sales tax on his mother's purchases. By middle school, she stopped asking if he'd done his homework, because he always had. 

"He has his own internal GPS," she says. "I never had to tell him to get up and go to practice or get up and do his work." 

Parker is perhaps his biggest fan, the one who enjoys bragging on her son. 

Urschel's father, John Sr., is stingier with praise. If he beamed inside when his son earned a perfect 4.0 average at Penn State or played his first pro game for the Ravens or published his first academic paper, he didn't let on. 

But he was an excellent college linebacker in Canada who went on to become the chief of surgery at Beth Israel Medical Center in Boston. So in a way, he laid the blueprint for Urschel's life. 

"My father is a brilliant man and he just gave me fantastic genes," he said. "Let's not discount the importance of that." 

Perhaps because he had such role models, Urschel never felt he had to sacrifice math for football or vice versa. 

It was sometimes a fight, his father said, to keep others from shoving him into more traditional boxes. He steered his son away from those who would push him into accounting or engineering, fields in which his gift for theoretical math would be wasted. At Penn State, an academic counselor associated with the football program questioned why Urschel would pursue such a difficult course load. 

"Culturally, these things aren't put together that often," John Sr. said. "It's just that he doesn't fit any stereotype. But he was protected by his own will and by his parents saying 'Don't listen to them.' " 

Urschel's math mentor, University of Maryland department chair Vadim Kaloshin, said he is "a truly unique individual." 

"John is supremely talented mathematically and physically," Kaloshin says. "He is also extremely well-organized. Otherwise, he would have had a hard time doing research mathematics at a very high level, while playing football most of his active time." 

Jim Trexler, who runs the Mathnasium tutoring center in Roland Park, says Urschel is a powerful example for kids who might want to give up academic pursuits in favor of extracurricular activities. "Our message with John is look, you can be great at both," says Trexler, a former college lacrosse coach. "Now, he's got a couple of different gears than the rest of us. He's a genius, he really is. But he shows the kids it is possible." 

Trexler received a call from Urschel's agent last year, and the player began visiting the Roland Park tutoring center shortly after, often arriving in shorts and flip flops and casually plopping down next to students. He lent his name to an annual scholarship, with the benefits including two one-on-one sessions with the winner. 

After Urschel completed the sessions with Kiri Maza, a Baltimore School for the Arts student, he gave her his cell number and said he'd be happy to talk math with her any time in the future. 

Time for football, math 

Asked if he's a different person when slamming into opposing linemen than when he's working through an equation, Urschel says not exactly. 

"It blends together somewhat in that there's this unified competitive nature," he explains. "Even in math, when I'm trying to solve a problem, I get very competitive about it. But it's different in that for football, I just love the physicality of it. In math, there's real elegance to it. There's beauty in taking this construct, which we have made, and using it to explain this fantastic and complex world we live in." 

Urschel knows others find it crazy, but he gleans genuine relaxation from dwelling in a theoretical realm of graphs and variables. 

As he walked off the field on a hot June day at the end of Ravens minicamp, he already imagined sitting riverside at a vacation home in upstate New York, reading math books as his girlfriend, the writer Louisa Thomas, worked beside him. 

But fear not Ravens fans. Urschel is also mastering the center position — where he's expected to back up Jeremy Zuttah in addition to backing up both guard positions. 

His improvement at the unfamiliar spot is obvious, said quarterback Joe Flacco. 

"I think he's doing a great job getting up there and making calls as quickly as he can and getting the ball back to me really well. I didn't really think that we skipped a beat with him in there this offseason," Flacco said. 

Urschel hopes to establish he can start at any of the three positions and to play in the NFL as long as someone will let him. Then he'll give himself over to math and family. 

He says he won't rely on others to grade him as he pursues this determined existence. He'll be the judge. 

"I'm not displeased," Urschel says when asked for an early assessment. "It's a work in progress." 
............................

Here are a few things of note that weren't mentioned in the article:

His $2.3 million contract runs from 2014 through 2017
He made $564,000 in 2014 ($144,000 of which was a signing bonus)
If he gets cut between now and 2017, the Ravens don't owe him a penny.

Urschel's car parked between those of two teammates at the practice facility

As for his reason for driving a used Nissa Versa, Urshel explains it this way:

"It's great on gas. It's surprisingly spacious. And you know what the best feeling is? You're driving into a parking deck, it's near full and you're on the first level and there is that space that everyone has passed because they said, 'No, we can't park in there.' And I take my Versa and I just go right in there. I'm on the first level, parking lot full and everyone else is parking on the upper deck where the car is getting hot. I'm not even taking the stairs."

Like I said, I was blown away by his story.  And I was left thinking about a couple of the quotes/themes suggested in the article:

"He is unusually self directed"
"He has his own internal GPS"
"I have a purpose"
"He'll be the judge"

Sure sounds like Emerson and self reliance to me.

KM