Ga Retired Educators Association: Fill & Download for Free

I got my ICS (Information and Computer Science) BS in 1975. That was back when mainframes were king, mini-computers were hot new thing, and the 8080 was just out. I have just retired!My degree was the “engine” for a life time of technical employment.Yes, I had to work to learn the “language flavor of the month” or the other empherial technology.But the foundations have lasted me a 40+ career.The foundations of Computer Science change little in my life time.Theory of computation, and the math (Discrete Math), has not changed in my life time and are essentail for program design.Algorithms have only chanced in have a few new algorithms in my life time. Most algorithms are applicable in any language.The ONLY think that has changed a lot and continues to change has been economic trade off of my programming time vs the computer time.In my career I went from writing assembly, to writting Pascal, to C++, to other very high level langagues like SQL and Prolog. The acceptance of using high level languages HAS CHANGED! Economics have driven software development to higher and higher langauges.Most programming languages are empherimal or temporary. FORTRAN and COBOL is no longer a primary langauges. Pascal, SNOBOL4, and BLISS (and many others) have come and gone.Java, Python, Ruby, Haskell, C++, C#, Objective C, Scratch, Swift, and others are the “new kids on the block.” Will they last? That remains to seen.C, FORTRAN, COBOL, LISP, and Smalltalk continue to have communities that use and need them. They have out lived many other langagues. Will they out live the new languages?C is firmly the preferred langauge for writing operating systems and other programming languages (like Java, Python, Ruby and the like). Much of the code (like operating systems, compilers, editors, linkers and loader, and high level language run time libraries) that were originally written in assembly code are now written in C. C has become the replacement of assembly language.Colleges and universities follow the curriculum which follows ACM recommendation.The people at ACM (Association of Computer Machinery) have worked hard to develope circulums that are meaningful for a colleges and universities. My education at Ga Tech followed those guidelines.Reference to ACM Curricula:Curricula Recommendations

Problems with 401(k) Plans401(k)s are an important part of retirement planning, but they're not perfectBY TROY ADKINSUpdated Nov 3, 2019[Over the past quarter of a century, 401(k) plans have evolved into the dominant retirement plan scheme for most U.S. workers. While many improvements have been made to the structure and features of 401(k) plans since their creation, they're not perfect.Here are six problems with the current 401(k) plan structure, along with ways to mitigate the effects.KEY TAKEAWAYSWhile 401(k) plans are a valuable part of retirement planning for most U.S. workers, they're not perfect.The value of 401(k) plans is based on the concept of dollar-cost averaging, but that's not always a reliable theory.Many 401(k) plans are expensive because of high administrative and record-keeping costs.Dollar-Cost AveragingYou may have bought into the concept of dollar-cost averaging because it was explained to you as a prudent investment methodology. Unfortunately, dollar-cost averaging is simply a convenient solution to justify the contributions channeled from your employer to your 401(k) plan.To explain, defined-contribution plans, like your 401(k) plan, require periodic contributions to be made to your retirement account with each paycheck. Therefore, without a theory such as dollar-cost averaging, funneling money on a periodic basis from your paycheck to your investment options would not make sense. Your investment options may be fully valued or, even worse, overvalued at the time the contributions are made.Fortunately, you can take control of your investment process by directing all of your contributions into a conservative investment option that is offered in your retirement plan. Then, when the time is right, you can make a strategic investment allocation to one or more of the less conservative funds offered in your 401(k) plan.Of course, you'll have to determine when the switch looks attractive from an investment standpoint. Nevertheless, you should expect this type of responsibility if you participate in a defined-contribution plan.Long Investment Time HorizonsYou have probably been told that your employer established a 401(k) plan on your behalf in order to provide you with a long-term savings plan for retirement. Given this premise, you may believe that you should develop a long-term strategic asset allocation based on a time horizon that exceeds a decade.Unfortunately, it's highly unlikely that the portfolio managers who are currently managing your investment options will be managing them 10 or more years from now. Therefore, for strategic allocation with a long-term focus, index funds can mitigate the likely mismatch between the shorter-term tenure of your fund managers and your longer-term investment holding period.Most active mutual funds do not outperform their index or benchmark, and you are better off putting your money into an index fund. A 1% saving can mean tens of thousands of extra dollars at retirement.If index funds aren't offered in your 401(k) plan, your current fund managers will be managing your money for many years to come. However, there is another option.First, you can develop a tactical asset allocation contingency plan in the event that one of your portfolio managers relinquishes responsibility. Next, you could open a traditional IRA or Roth IRA and contribute up to your legal limit through various index funds not available in your 401(k) plan.401(k) FeesA qualified 401(k) plan is an expensive employee benefit. 401(k) plans entail many compliance issues that have to be monitored and constant service and administration. What's more, a number of education and communication services must be offered to plan participants.Given these mandates, it's highly likely that you are paying for them through things like:Participant feesSupplemental asset-based chargesItemized costs for services such as loans, hardship withdrawals, and qualified domestic relations ordersHigher fund expensesCosts are particularly steep for smaller employers and plans where a lack of economies of scale fosters higher expenses.Fortunately, you can mitigate the negative costs of your 401(k) plan by developing a tailored retirement plan strategy. First, you should always invest in your 401(k) plan up to the point where you receive 100% of your employer's matching contribution.Then, you should open a traditional IRA or Roth IRA and contribute up to your legal limit. the investment options available to you through an IRA will be much greater and less expensive than the investment options available to you through an employer-sponsored 401(k) plan.After you have maxed out the money that you can contribute to an IRA, you should then increase your contribution rate in your 401(k) plan to reach your desired level of savings.Lackluster RecordkeepingRecordkeeping for assets in your 401(k) plan is complex and time-consuming, even with today's technology. Therefore, few retirement plan providers distribute investor-friendly statements. Instead, they generate only what the law requires, which is not sufficient for you to make a useful financial assessment of your investment strategy.To successfully plan for retirement, you need to know on a monthly basis your beginning account balance, how much you and your employer contributed, the number of transfers or withdrawals you made, the amount of any gains or losses, and your ending balance.Unfortunately, your record-keeper probably doesn't provide this information in a user-friendly way. To get the data, you may have to extract the information from your monthly or quarterly statements and build a spreadsheet to track the details.Once you have properly compiled the information, you should manually calculate your annualized rate of return. It's worthwhile seeking outside advice to get an accurate view of how your investments are performing."Often, it is difficult to go through your quarterly statement and decipher how well your investment strategy is working," says Carlos Dias, Jr., a wealth manager with Excel Tax & Wealth Group in Lake Mary, Fla."By consulting with an outside fee-only advisor, you can see how your 401(k) investments are really performing and what modifications can be made without having to transfer to an IRA,"Sub-Par Investment Plan Designs and Marginal Quality Investment OptionsIn terms of retirement plan design, the conventional wisdom in the 401(k) plan investment industry is that "less is more." For example, a comprehensive retirement plan design offers a group of investment options that cover roughly five asset class categories. These categories in order of theoretical risk are:Money-market funds or stable value fundsCore bond fundsLarge-capitalization fundsSmall-capitalization fundsInternational funds.The concept behind "less is more" is to streamline your investment decision-making responsibilities to minimize the complexity of your investment choices. You can develop a diversified portfolio by investing in funds that fall into these five asset-class categories.But it's likely that you'll also need access to Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS funds), high-yield funds, REIT funds, mid-capitalization equity funds, emerging markets funds, and commodity funds to build a comprehensive portfolio for your long-term financial needs."When I find a client’s 401(k) has limited (or subpar) investment choices, I always look to see if they have a self-directed brokerage window available to them," says Carol Berger, CFP® with Berger Wealth Management in Peachtree City, Ga."This allows them to open an account on the 'brokerage window' side and opens up many more investment choices. The client then has their regular contributions go into this account versus the 'regular' 401(k) choices."The quality of the investment options offered in your plan may be well below average, particularly if you are a participant in a small retirement plan. Therefore, you should assess how comprehensive your 401(k) retirement plan design is and conduct a thorough due diligence analysis before making any type of investment.Once this assessment is complete, your best course of action is to notify your human resources department of any enhancements that should be made. In addition, you should offset any of your 401(k) plan deficiencies by investing in a host of index funds through an individual IRA."One frequently overlooked option for an investor who has a poor selection of fund choices is to speak to your employer. Frequently, employers are not deliberately trying to provide you with poor choices. Many times they are given these choices by the advisor on the plan. If you request different or additional options, it is possible your employer will say yes. Many employers are looking for this type of feedback," says Kirk Chisholm, wealth manager at Innovative Advisory Group in Lexington, Mass.Complex Tax ImplicationsArguably the most highly touted 401(k) plan attribute is the pre-tax treatment of invested cash flows. This feature is important because if you have more money to invest upfront, you should have a greater opportunity to enhance your returns down the road.However, before accepting the premise that pre-tax investing is an investment advantage, keep in mind that when you withdraw your money from your 401(k) plan, the entire amount will be taxed at your personal income tax level.This may be a disadvantage if your investment strategy achieves substantial long-term gains that could have been taxed at the lower capital gains tax rate level. Since these gains will be taxed as income under a 401(k) plan structure, your perceived pre-tax advantage on the front end will be offset to a certain degree by the tax disadvantage on the back end.Assessing tax implications is complex because your tax status and tax laws will change over time. In addition, new retirement plan schemes will be developed in the future. Therefore, what looks like a good deal today may very well be a bad deal tomorrow.Most active mutual funds, on which 401(k) plans are based, don't outperform their index or benchmark. You're better off putting your money into an index fund.The Bottom LineWhile 401(k) plans are an important part of your employee benefits package, the issues associated with some of their provisions are problematic. Remember that in a defined-contribution pension plan like the 401(k), you bear all of the investment risks.The amount of cash that's in the fund when you retire is what you will receive as a pension. Thus, there is no guarantee that you will receive anything from this defined-contribution plan.The fund may lose all (or a substantial part) of its value in the markets just as you're ready to start taking distributions. While that's true of any financial investment, the risk is compounded by the relative inaccessibility of 401(k) money throughout the account's—and your—lifetime."The final problem is that your 401(k) assets are not liquid," says Dan Stewart, CFA®, president of Revere Asset Management, Inc. in Dallas, Texas. "Make sure that you still save enough on the outside for emergencies and expenses you may have before retirement. Do not put all of your savings into your 401(k) where you cannot easily access it, if necessary."Consider these issues and take an active role in preparing for your financial future. With careful planning, you should be able to mitigate the negative features of your 401(k) plan and meet your retirement plan goals.]

I always see this type of question framed this way: The government owes me and should take care of my needs, why doesn’t everyone want that? I appreciate seeing that question worded this way for a change.Why would anyone feel feel that the government, e.g. your fellow tax payers, owes you services that you can provide for yourself if you’re able to do what’s needed? Isn’t more freedom than any other country in the history of the world ever enjoyed enough? Or, an aging, but solid, infrastructure? Or, a better quality of life? Or, the highest income per capita. Or, leading in innovations, technology and medical breakthroughs? Or, how about having the strongest military in the world to allow you and your loved ones to sleep easy each night? It amazes me that there are unappreciative ingrates who think they’re owed even more. Meantime, people from other countries are risking their lives to have a little piece of what we’ve always had. The argument that "some people" can’t afford healthcare or college just doesn’t cut it.In the case of healthcare for example, why should everyone be provided for just because 7% of Americans don’t have it and can’t get it because their salary is above the poverty level, and/or they’re self employed? That means 93% don’t need, or want, government provided healthcare, so why force them into it? For the 7% that do? Putting emotions and sympathy aside for a moment, how much sense does that make? Wouldn’t it make more sense to figure out a way to make it affordable for that 7%?I think what we have here is a solution, Universal Healthcare, in search of a problem to solve. But, many politicians push the idea on us because it gives the government more control over the citizens. Obviously, they can’t come out and state it that way because they’d get no support from the vast majority of voters. So, they have to come up with a problem that stirs up people’s emotions in order to sell their "solution", using false pretenses.That’s backwards, and too many gullible voters are letting their emotions blind their common sense so they can’t see it. But, when you’re doing a math problem, do you come up with the answer first, say 27, and then look for a problem that yields that result? No sane person starts with a solution in hand and create a problem to apply it to. But, that’s what the Liberals in Washington are doing.The logical way to approach the situation is to identify the problem, and then find the solution; picking the best from many possibilities. The real problem, the honest one, is that 7% don't have healthcare because they fall between the cracks which the government could fix, if they were so inclined. The poor already have government sponsored healthcare in a variety of programs. The vast majority of Americans have healthcare though employment, Medicare for retirees, or military or V.A. benefits. So, obviously, we need to find a solution to help out the 7% that have fallen through the cracks. That is a far easier and less costly problem to fix than scraping all existing healthcare and starting from square one for people who neither need it nor want it.I’d say the current approach is a "typical government solution", and in some ways it is, but I know that they are simply trying to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes, confusing them by stirring up their emotions, all to gain more power. Saul Alinsky has been misattributed as saying in his Rules for Radicals, that there are 8 rules to follow to create a socialist state. According to Snopes.com, "this list is simply a modern variant of the decades-old, apocryphal Communist Rules for Revolution" which, in my estimation, is even worse. But, no matter where it comes from, the message is the same; control these 8 areas, and you control a nation.8 steps to topple a nation and create a socialist state (author unknown)1) Healthcare — Control healthcare and you control the people2) Poverty — Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.3) Debt — Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.4) Gun Control — Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.5) Welfare — Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income).6) Education — Take control of what people read and listen to — take control of what children learn in school.7) Religion — Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools.8) Class Warfare — Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take from (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.What about other social programs and where they fit in to all this? Well, let’s look at those other 2 services you mentioned.We can cross number one off the list, because they’ve figured out how to achieve it without being obvious to many. How about #2, Poverty and #5, Welfare? That’s part of the basic services the government has tricked voters into demanding through manipulation of their emotions. But, is a government check, or a mandated "living wage" (a subjective term) the only solution to poverty? The thing about poverty is once you’re in it, it’s hard to get out. So, rather than create programs that keep people locked into dependency upon the government for "Food, Housing, and Income", how about training programs with short-term support until jobs paying a "living wage" are obtained? When you learned to ride a bike, did your parent hold on to it forever, never letting go? Or, did they teach you how to get up on 2 wheels and, then, let go when you were able to do it by yourself? How did it feel when you realized they were no longer holding on and you were doing it without help? Pretty great! Why deprive the poor of that same opportunity? Because "control(ling) every aspect of their lives" is the real goal. More power and control for the government is the real goal, disguised as compassion.Now, let’s look at education, #6 on the list; in order to "create a Socialist state", the government must "Take control of what people read and listen to — take control of what children learn in school." They already control what’s being taught in public primary and secondary schools. A teacher in CA is currently suing over it. Teacher Sues California Teacher’s Association Over Extreme Left-Wing Agenda I just retired from a career in public education, and I can verify that pushing the left’s agenda is pervasive throughout the country, not just CA.I know. Your point is having college paid for by the government and "free college" sounds pretty simple, doesn’t it? But, do you honestly believe they’ll just pay your tuition and walk away? What about "The Devil is in details"? You know; “read the fine print". Will they place tighter restrictions on who qualifies to apply or attend like other countries do? Will admission become tougher? Will there be restrictions on majors so that everyone isn’t taking underwater basket weaving, or will they require you take only those majors with good job prospects upon graduation (so that graduates get added to the pool of taxpayers)? How about majors where there isn’t a lot of demand out in the real world, like women's studies? Will they just be eliminated all together? Will they require students to take skill assessments so that their abilities can be matched to a well suited major, even though the student doesn’t want to study that subject? The country has a glut of attorneys right now; will you still be able to study pre-law, and what about grad school, or law school afterwards? Who pays for that? What happens if you drop out or flunk out before you get your degree; will you have to repay the government the money you wasted? (Unlike Mom and Dad) What happens when you drop or flunk classes; will they demand you reimburse those expenses? What if you switch majors or drop so many classes that your 4 year degree takes 5, or 6? Will there be a limit on how long you can go, or the number of credit hours they’ll pay for? How about books, housing, meals, and various fees? I was on a scholarship, but had to pay those myself. So, my education was "sort of" free. Tuition only. Thatvsame scholarship, the GA HOPE, has so many students on it, that it was changed to a partial tuition scholarship depending on your GPA, after just a few years. And, since GA has a state scholarship paid for by the Lottery, will they also have to pay for education with increased taxes? Or, will the HOPE go away? What about academic or sports scholarships around the country?You see, when someone pays for something, they want a say in how their money is spent. There will be "strings attached" and they will want control. It only makes sense, after all. It’s their money that could be put to better use elsewhere, rather than being wasted on someone who takes 5 years to get a 4 year degree in gender issues, only to find there are no employers looking for people with that degree.So, before people demand "free healthcare and college for all", be sure you know exactly what that means and what the actual "benefit" is going to look like when it’s finally delivered. Will "non-critical” surgeries be attended to in a timely fashion, or will you have to live uncomfortably for years while waiting, as a woman I know who needs non critical heart surgery is doing in Ireland? If you’re diagnosed with stage 4 cancer, will treatment begin immediately like a friend had here in the U.S., or will the wait take more time than you have left, like his friends in England told him would have happened over there? (It’s been 8 years and counting, and he still gets monthly treatments) Will you go to a clinic with a sprained ankle, only to be told the wait is so long (9+ hours) that you’d be better off paying a large fee for a private doctor, like they do in Canada?The TRUTH About Universal Healthcare! (from a Canadian)Will it bankrupt the country in a few years? Finnish Government Collapses Due to Rising Cost of Universal Health Care - Frontiers of FreedomWill you be able to go to the college of your choice, or will your college, major, and post graduation job position be assigned to you, like my daughter’s best friend who teaches college in France? Will you be helped with training so you can finally climb out of the depths of poverty, or will they pull up the ladder, leaving you down in the hole while they throw just enough money at you to get by, as we’re doing now, in the U.S.?There’s a reason why the old saying "There are no free lunches" became so popular in our culture; it’s because, in the end, you're going to pay in one way or another. And, what’s so bad, after all, about taking care of oneself so we end up with exactly what we want, instead of settling for the crumbs the "benevolent", controlling government decides we’ll get?Before Americans spend any more time dreaming about all the services we now get, but without having to pay for them (if only), we need ask many more, specific, questions about what those "free" services will look like. That free lunch one thinks they’re going to get, is going to turn out to be 2 slices of stale white bread with a single slice of cheap bologna between them and a glass of water, when they were expecting a hot juicy hamburger with fries and a big drink. Only the most naive would believe otherwise.