New York Times best-selling author and populist conservative columnist Ann Coulter says Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) hurt his campaign this election cycle when he dropped the anti-open borders position that he held for decades.

During an exclusive interview with SiriusXM Patriots Breitbart News Tonight, Coulter said Sanders once defended working-class Americans against the negative impacts of open borders and mass immigration but has since hurt his campaign by endorsing decriminalizing the U.S.-Mexico border, taxpayer-funded healthcare for illegal aliens, and an end to deportations of all illegal aliens.

LISTEN:

[Bernie Sanders] really would have helped himself if he had not flipped on immigration, Coulter said. And Im not just saying because I think he shouldnt have switched on immigration. But if not flipping your support for Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro doesnt hurt you, if instead that can be seen as admirable consistency. For one thing, hed get huge consistency points.

This crazy idea that only members of the Republican National Committee believe and apparently a lot of our media is that what Hispanics living here legally really really want is for their deadbeat brothers-in-law is to come up and sleep on the extra couch and undercut their wages, Coulter continued. No, its the entire working class, African-American working class, the Hispanic working class, the white working-class who are hurt the most by mass low wage immigration.

Sanders agenda has swung so far to the left on immigration that the United We Dream Action organization, a leading open borders lobbying front, endorsed him ahead of the California Democrat presidential primary.

Coulter said that while the GOP donor class and Republican establishment have failed to realize the unpopularity of mass illegal and legal immigration, even former President Obama understood amnesty was not what would win Hispanic Americans over.

Consider that in 2012 when Romney was running against Obama, all the Republicans, Rupert Murdoch were haranguing Romney to drop that self-deportation thing. No, no, youve got to be for amnesty. We need the Hispanic vote,' Coulter said. Democrats just sit back with their feet up on the desk thinking Oh yeah, you do that Republicans.'

In Obamas ads in 2012, in Spanish, running on Spanish language radio stations, never mentioned amnesty, Coulter said. He talked about how he was giving them all free healthcare.

Meanwhile, Coulter said black American voters and issues that most impact them are being left behind.

The one saving grace from this because Im just about to the point of writing my final book Screw It, Were Doomed at which point all there really is left for us to is take revenge on the people who have wrecked our country, Coulter said. And were getting the initial taste of it right now.

Hispanics are voting for Bernie, not because of immigration, hes had the toughest position on immigration, just like they voted in Venezuela, they want socialism, Coulter said. When the countrys over, Im volunteering to go work for Sanders and AOC to make sure we have a really strict wealth tax. I want to clean out the Chamber of Commerce-types, I want to bankrupt the Koch brothers

The 2020 presidential election will be the first time in history that black Americans are outnumbered in the U.S. electorate by Hispanic American voters a direct result of the nations legal immigration system that continues to import about 1.2 million foreign nationals every year, primarily from Central and South America.

Estimates project that the number of eligible Hispanic voters in 2020 will tick up to a record 13.3 percent of the entire U.S. electorate, while eligible black American voters will make up about 12.5 percent of the electorate. This translates to about 32 million Hispanics who will be eligible to vote in the 2020 election and about 30 million eligible black American voters.

John Binder is a reporterfor Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at@JxhnBinder.

.

Continue reading here:

ExclusiveAnn Coulter: Bernie Sanders Would Have Helped Himself If He Had Not Flipped on Immigration - Breitbart

Say what you will about Chris Matthewsat least hes consistent. In more than two decades as the host of MSNBCs Hardball, he was a force of nature, plowing through each days news with a mix of enthusiasm, petulance and wonkish bluster. His exit on Monday was equally chaotic. Let me start with my headline: Im retiring, Matthews greeted viewers. After a short monologue in which he apologized for the way hed treated some women during his tenure and said he was ceding his platform to younger generations, the 74-year-old commentator did just that, leaving his apparently shocked 40-year-old colleague, Steve Kornacki, to cover the rest of the hour.

For those frustrated by the extent to which Matthews generation has shirked its responsibilities to future citizens of Earth, there was a hint of symbolism in that moment. Here was a quintessential baby boomeran individualist who gravitates toward personalities more than policies, a journalist whod written speeches for Jimmy Carter and books on the Kennedys, a man with no fear of publicly expressing his wildest opinionsleaving a workforce where hed spent decades at the advantageous end of massive systemic power imbalances. Despite the scandals that preceded it, Matthews was allowed to frame his speedy departure as retirement. And as soon as hed done so, on the eve of Super Tuesday no less, he offered a vague mea culpa and vanished into the night. Sorry, kids! I screwed it up! Hope you do better!

Its trueMatthews did screw things up. The circumstances surrounding his sudden retirement, whether voluntary or not, are no mystery. Following a painful post-debate interview on Feb. 25, in which he grilled Elizabeth Warren for bringing up crass, sexist, intimidating comments Michael Bloomberg had allegedly made to female employees, GQ columnist Laura Bassett published an account of the crass, sexist, intimidating comments she says Matthews made when she was a guest on his show. After Bernie Sanders won the Nevada caucuses, just three days earlier, Matthews had to apologize for likening the Democratic Socialists rise to the fall of France during World War II. (Casual Nazi comparisons are rarely prudent, but it seems obvious that theyre an especially bad idea when the object of your criticism is a Jew with relatives who died in the Holocaust.)

Bassett notes, in her essay, that several other women have confided in her about Matthews behavior. His whole modus operandi, she concludes, seems to be inviting smart women onto his show, flirting with them or otherwise making them uncomfortable before or while the camera rolls, asking them a question on air and then immediately interrupting them to tell them why theyre wrong. The observation reminded me of Matthews former rival Bill OReilly, who was notorious during his time at Fox News for shouting down guests with whom he disagreed and who was fired in 2017 when it came to light that the network had settled multiple sexual harassment suits against him. If #MeToo has taught us anything, its that this kind of misconduct isnt confined to boors. But its hard to believe talk-show hosts who let their anger and sexism run wild on live TV are keeping them under control, or even recognizing them for what they are, after the cameras stop rolling.

For much of its existence, cable news has been defined by vitriol on both sides of the aisle, from Donald Trumps Fox News hype man Sean Hannity to Matthews short-fused former MSNBC colleague Keith Olbermann. (CNNs calmer anchors tend to fan the flames of existing political controversies rather than ignite new ones along partisan lines. Its the lowest-rated of the three networks.) With Matthews gone and a new election cycle revving up, it seems like the right time to ask whether the young people he talked up on his way out stand a chance at saving cable newsor if the best Gens X-Z can do is hope this monster our parents and grandparents generations created dies out now that cable is itself becoming obsolete.

If Super Tuesday was any indicationand if a bigger-than-expected night for Joe Biden didnt inhibit any potential for colorful invective among in-house pundits who, like Matthews, seemed nervous about Sanders early surgeMSNBC is going to be a tamer place from now on. Anchoring a rotating panel of commentators were Brian Williams, who has carved out a role as the networks blandly authoritative answer to Wolf Blitzer, and Rachel Maddow, whose wry delivery and fondness for background research made her its biggest Gen X success story. The only real source of amusement was Kornackis nervous energy as he parsed stats in real time.

Spotlight Story

How to Manage Your Anxiety About Coronavirus

If you are worried about getting COVID-19, here's how you can manage your coronavirus anxiety and stay calm.

But as entertaining as it could be to watch Matthews and his ilk put their feet in their mouths, its hard to make a case that 24/7 cable news was ever healthy for the national discourse. One of the first shows on a pre-left-of-center MSNBC, The Contributors, helped launch the careers of far-right provocateurs Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham. Jon Stewarts unexpectedly sober observations on CNNs Crossfire during the 2004 election cycle, when he famously chastised partisan hack co-hosts Tucker Carlson and Paul Begala for treating political debates like professional wrestling, still apply.

In the 20th century, cable news channels at least served a comprehensible purpose, as forums for real-time news and on-the-fly analysis. But since the turn of the millennium, digital platforms have owned breaking newsand millions of Americans now turn to social media for political conversations in which they can actually participate. Its hard to tell, these days, whether Twitter has adopted the tone of cable news or vice versa. Together with a President who couldnt stop making headlines if his life depended on it, theyve created an anxious new normal where it feels like no one is ever not obsessing over politics.

All cable news does is filter the endless feed of information through a series of TV personalities who are most entertaining when theyre mad, wrong or offensive. Which suggests that remaking the medium to suit younger viewers isnt just a risky business proposition; its a dangerous one. At the risk of sounding like the oldest fossil of all, heres an idea: Maybe news shouldnt be entertainment. Maybe it should just be news.

Most Popular on TIME

1

Should You Cancel Travel Plans Amid COVID-19 Concerns? Here's What to Consider

2

Elizabeth Warren Ends 2020 Presidential Bid

3

Despite CDC Guidance, Why Are So Many Wearing Face Masks?

Contact us at editors@time.com.

Read more:

Chris Matthews Ceded Cable News to a New Generation. But Theyd Be Better Off Without It - TIME

EXCLUSIVE: Top Republican senators, led by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., plan to meetThursday at the White House with President Trump to discuss possible immigration measuresin case the Supreme Court strikes down an Obama-era ruling shielding illegal immigrants from deportation, Fox News has learned -- a push likely to revive concerns among Trumps base of an election-yearamnesty push.

Thelawmakers are set to meet, at the invitation of the White House,with Trump around noon to discuss what would happen should the top court strike down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order, asource familiar with the negotiations said. A decision on DACA is expected in June. The Republicans are said to include Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas; Kevin Cramer, R-N.D.; Tom Cotton, R-Ark.;Martha McSally, R-Ariz.;Mike Lee, R-Utah;Ron Johnson, R-Wis.;Thom Tillis, R-N.C. and David Perdue, R-Ga.

SANCTUARY CITIES MAKE ARRESTING CRIMINAL ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS HARDER, PUT OFFICERS AT RISK: DHS WATCHDOG

Graham, on Thursday morning, told Fox News that the meeting was going ahead and it was related to the coming DACA ruling.

"Just to see, you know, where we are in terms of the DACA Supreme Court case, [there's a] pretty good chance that the president will win, being able to set aside the Obama-era DACA regulations and what's the play after that," he said.

The source told Fox News that a comprehensive immigration reform deal was to be discussed, but a Graham spokesman pushed back, saying thatthe meeting is to discuss DACA, andcomprehensive immigration reform was just one of a broad range of topicsthatcould potentially be discussed.

A spokesman for Lee confirmed toFox News that the senatorhad been invited to the White House to talk immigration, but that he hadn't heard anything about a deal for Dreamers. The offices of Sens. Johnson and Cramer also confirmed their attendance at the meeting.

Trump vowed during his 2016 campaign toendDACA but has also said he is open to a broader bill that would allow those affected -- young migrants dubbed Dreamers who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children -- to stay as part of broader immigration plan that sees funding for border security in exchange for a "pathway to citizenship" as well as expansion of visas and green cards. Even as Republicans fight DACA in court, there is some bipartisan appetite for finding a legislative way to protect Dreamers, considering that in many casesthe decision to illegally enter the U.S. was not their own.

An eventual, if elusive, immigration pact, particularly one that succeeds by pickingup Democratic support, could essentially boost the presidents image among moderatesas a deal-maker who can get things done where others have failed. Yet,it is risky and likelyto fuel furtherconcern among immigration hawks in Trumps base.

"It is risky, it makes sense that Graham is the one taking the lead givenhis prominent role in past efforts...but itwould make a lot more sense if someone hawkish took the lead on this," Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates for lower levels of immigration, told Fox News.

Krikorian said that Trump risks being seen as "selling out" on his signature campaign promises on immigration, but the White House could deal with thatrisk by coming up with a deal the president can defend, andincluding provisions that no-one beyond the actual DACA recipients, such as their relatives, gets legal status as well.

"A tough enough deal that he could justify it, because there is political support for legalizing people who lived here for years and came here as 8-year-olds," he said.

While the delegation includes a range of immigration hardliners whose involvement could potentially dilute anything too far-reaching, Grahamhas been eyed with suspicion by conservative activistsfor years for his pushes on immigration reform.

Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh once dubbed the South Carolina senator Lindsey Grahamnesty for his repeated efforts, alongsidethen-Arizona Sen. John McCain, to try andget immigration reform through Congress -- a move that was killed during the Bush administration aftera push by conservative activists.In 2018, conservative commentator Ann Coulter called Graham the "single worst person to negotiate" such a deal.

Pushes for immigration reform have also been blamed for helping doom the presidential aspirations of a number of top Republicans, including Jeb Bush, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and even Graham himself.

ICE CHIEF RIPS NEW YORK FOR SHARING DRIVER DATA WITH CANADA, BUT NOT US IMMIGRATION AGENTS

A call for a comprehensive immigration reform plan was included in a post-2012 election "autopsy" report by the Republican National Committee. The nomination of Trump in 2016 was seen as a rebuke to that call, particularlyby the party base.

"What Lindsey Graham is trying to do isn't only bad policy, it's bad politics. His amnesty agenda is in line with the 2012 GOP autopsy report that should have been dead and buried after President Trump was elected," the source familiar with negotiations told Fox News.

Graham himself has at times taken a tough stance on illegal immigration. Last year, he introduced a bill that would end asylum claims at the border and return unaccompanied minors to their home countries, as part of an effort to end the then-escalating crisis at the border.

Trump has racked up a series of wins at the border, securing funding for the wall, and dramatically reducing border crossings by implementing international agreements with neighboring countries. But there remains in some pro-Trump circles a sneaking suspicion that a betrayal on so-called amnesty for illegal immigrantsis just around the corner, considering the hefty appetite in Washington D.C. for a deal.

While its not immediately clear what the deal could include, there are a number of bills and proposals already circling that could be covered-- in measures both passed by the House or mentioned in prior stabs at immigration reform.

Krikorian said he believes there will likely be enforcement measures in any agreement, butsaid there should also be an offsetting reduction in legal immigration if DACA-recipients are going to end up with legal status.

"If we're giving away 700,000 green cards, that's almost an extra year of immigration, there needs to be some reduction," he said.

The Democrat-controlled House passed a farm bill in Decemberthat granted a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants working in the agriculture industry. While it hasnt yet been taken up by the Senate, it could be brought in to discussions. Other aspects, including green card reform, legal status for DACA recipients and visa reforms, could also be part of the deal, the source said.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Trump too has tried to push a DACA deal before, in January 2019 offering Democrats legal status for DACA recipients in exchange for money for the border wall. He later backed away from the deal after pushback from immigration hawks.

Politico reported last month that a White House proposal was in the works to overhaul America's immigration system to replace it with a merit-based system.But that too has struggled with hawks, as it doesn't make the E-Verify work verification system mandatory, nor does it reduce overall immigration levels.

Fox News' Jason Donner contributed to this report.

More:

Lindsey Graham to lead group of senators to White House for immigration talks - Fox News

Published: 12:20 Thursday 05 March 2020

The Mental Health and Wellbeing event, taking place next Friday (March 13), Saturday (March 14) and Sunday (March 15), will coincide with Sikh New Year celebrations.

Sessions will include a new mums coffee morning on the Friday to launch the event, men's and women's yoga classes, thai chi, workshops on how children can stay safe online, talks on mental health, positive thinking, domestic violence, suicide, addiction and self-harm awareness and other subjects from experts, professionals and counselors and an exhibition about the work of charities in and around the town.

Cllr Mini Mangat (Labour, Leamington Willes): "This three-day health event at the Gurdwara Sahib is a first for us here in Leamington and Warwick.

"It is crucial to break through mental health stigmas that can exist within our community by focusing on raising awareness and access to support for taboo subjects within mental health like addiction, suicide, coping with bereavement and domestic abuse to name a few.

"This is a collaborative approach with many volunteers and agencies coming together, and speakers who have lived experiences from within the community, reaching out and taking important information and messages direct to the community in the Gurdwara Sahib.

"This event coincides with the Sikh New Year beginning on March 14 2020 with the month of Chet.

"Starting the new year communicating and sharing that it's OK not to be OK and that it's absolutely OK to ask for help is a great message for the new year ahead."

So for more information call 07788 293391 or 07875 464138.

Read the original post:

Three-day mental health and wellbeing event for all to be held at Sikh temple in Leamington - Warwick Courier

BENGALURU A supply crunch in drought stricken Thailand pushed rice export prices to their highest in 6-1/2 years this week, while Vietnamese rates bounced back to a more than one-year high on firm demand.

Thailands benchmark 5% broken rice prices jumped to $460-$467 per tonne on Thursday, their highest since August 2013, from $430-$452 last week.

Most of the demand is from domestic buyers who are stocking up rice amid fears of shortages, a Bangkok-based trader said.

The protracted drought in many rice producing areas caused market concerns over possible supply shortages and is the main reason for the price hike as overseas demand remained flat, traders said.

The dry season, which usually starts in November and lasts until April, could persist into June, the Thai government said.

In Vietnam, rates for 5% broken rice rose to $390-$400 on Thursday, their highest since December 2018, versus $365-$375 a week earlier on strong demand.

The Philippines remains the largest buyer, and we have seen more orders coming in from Malaysia, Cuba and Africa, a trader based in Ho Chi Minh City said.

Vietnams rice exports in the first two months of this year likely rose 11.5% from a year earlier to 811,000 tonnes, the governments General Statistics Office said on Saturday.

The strong demand has outpaced the rise in supplies as local farmers are still harvesting rice from the winter-spring crop, another trader in the city said, adding that farmers have harvested 60%-70% of the crop.

Meanwhile, in top exporter India, rice export prices extended losses due to weak demand and as rupee fell to the lowest level in 16 months.

Indias 5% broken parboiled variety rates inched lower to $367-$371 per tonne this week, from last weeks $369-$373.

Weak rupee is allowing us to lower prices in dollar terms, but still demand is not picking up, said an exporter based at Kakinada in the southern state of Andhra Pradesh.

Weak rupee increases exporters margin from the overseas sale.

Neighboring Bangladesh has set a production target of 20 million tonnes for summer variety rice crop Boro, for the current year, a senior agriculture ministry official said.

Boro contributes more than half Bangladeshs typical annual rice output of around 35 million tonnes.

In 2019, the country produced a record 20.4 million tonnes of Boro, up from 19.6 million tonnes the previous year, the agriculture ministry says. (Reporting by Rajendra Jadhav in Mumbai, Ruma Paul in Dhaka, Khanh Vu in Hanoi and Panu Wongcha-um in Bangkok; editing by David Evans)

See the article here:

Asia Rice-Drought-hit Thailand's rates soar to 6-1/2 yr peak on supply dearth - Financial Post

Fear is infecting the stock market on concerns that the spread of the coronavirus will interfere with global trade. In the past few days, U.S. stocks have slid into a correction, defined as a 10% drop from the market top.

Its safe to say that only day traders like thinking about stock market corrections. But for the rest of us, trying to ignore market free falls is not a bad strategy, especially when it comes to a long-term goal like retirement.

Thats because one of the best ways to make sure your retirement accounts survive economic turbulence is to fortify those accounts as well as you can and then go do something else, come what may.

See: Heres how the 30 Dow industrials companies are prepping for the impact of the coronavirus

Dont get caught up in the motion of the market when investing for a long-term goal, says Chris Remedios, a certified financial planner with Remedios Financial Planning in San Francisco. If it makes you uncomfortable when things go down, dont look.

Taking the steps below will help protect yourIRA, 401(k) and other retirement accounts from events beyond your control.

During big market SPX, -3.34% swings, your investment portfolio could well lose money. This is where ignoring the market becomes important if youre investing for retirement.

You have a long-term goal try to focus on that long-term goal and not the short-term volatility of the markets, says Rob Williams, vice president of financial planning at the Schwab Center for Financial Research.

If the turbulence has you worried, dont forget that though the market is falling, its falling from record highs. Investing in the stock market remains the best way to achieve long-term growth.

Even a diversified portfolio can lose money, but diversification helps stem your losses by reducing investment risk. You want to be sure youve spread your money around so if any stock market sector crashes particularly hard, youve got investments in other sectors providing stability.

Dont be too exposed to one or two stocks. We see a lot of individuals who are invested all in one company, Williams says.

While investing in single stocks can be risky, a single mutual fund can be completely diversified. Target-date mutual funds offer one-stop-shopping convenience, because they invest in a broad swath of stocks and bonds. Alternatively, you can build your ownsimple retirement portfolioto get you to your goals. Heres more onhow to invest your IRA.

Asset allocation means figuring out what percentage of your money goes to which investment. At the highest level, that means how much money you have in stocks versus bonds.

Also see: Coronavirus fears are clobbering the stock market is it doing the same to your retirement?

Your time frame is important here. If youre decades away from retirement, a hefty allocation to stocks makes sense, even when the stock market is tanking because you have time to let your money ride that out. Just how hefty your allocation is will depend on yourrisk tolerance.

But if youre closer to retirement, make sure any money youll need for living expenses in the next five years or so is in cash or a cash-like investment such as short-term bonds.

A rule of thumb is to have about 60% in stocks and 40% in bonds or cash at the retirement date. Moving toward that is a good way to be prepared for a down market, Williams says.

If youre in your 20s, 30s or 40s and dont have plans to retire until youre in your 60s, time is on your side. Dont sell out of the stock market when it starts dropping.

In fact, a better strategy might be to buy more shares. A down market just means youre buying stocks on sale, Williams says.

Related: Retiree warning: History suggests were overdue for a bear market

Even in your 50s or older, buying might be a strategy for you too, given that retirement may last as long as two or even three decades.

While youre aligning your investment strategy with your long-term goals, assess your overall personal finances, too.

A stock market correction can be the push you need to clean up your finances. Smart steps to put on your to-do list include paying down debt and building an emergency fund. Moving forward on those goals sets you up to better weather any economic headwinds ahead.

And dont think you have to get to perfect in 60 seconds or less. Its OK to take small steps toward each goal. For example, just $500 to $1,000 in a savings account can help provide a safe harbor from rough economic waters.

Excerpt from:
As markets drop, think long-term with your retirement savings - MarketWatch

What should you do if you planned to work but it turns out you can't?

If you planned to work in retirement but you discover there are no jobs you can do, you need to make some swift changes to your lifestyle.

Start by assessing the amount of income actually available to you from Social Security, retirement savings, and any pension money you have. Make sure you're calculating income from savings based on a safe withdrawal rate. This should be no more than 4% of your account balance, while some experts suggest it should be even less.

Compare the income available to you with your budget to see if there's a shortfall. If it turns out you'll have too little income without a paycheck and you can't find work, you need to make some budget cuts quickly. This could mean downsizing to a smaller home, which could help you to boost your savings account balance if you cash out home equity. You might also need to give up a car or move to an area that has a lower cost of living.

The key is to make sure you don't draw down your retirement account balance in an effort to maintain a lifestyle you really can't afford without the paycheck you planned on having.

While you may want to work as a senior, chances are very good you won't be able to. To make sure you aren't left with too little money when it turns out holding a job isn't possible, always set your retirement planning goals without the expectation of a paycheck. If it turns out working is doable, you can use the extra income to enjoy your life a little bit more.

Read the original post:
55% of Americans Are Making This Retirement Planning Mistake - The Motley Fool

Theres bad news and so-so news about the retirement insecurity of American female workers in the new Aegon Retirement Readiness Survey 2019. But the good news is that if employers, the U.S. government, financial advisers and those workers take a few key steps, todays cloudy retirement prospects for women could become sunnier.

After receiving thesurvey of 14,400 employees and 1,600 retirees in 15 countries from Aegon Center for Longevity and Retirement and nonprofits Transamerica Center for Retirement Studies (TCRS) and Instituto de Longevidaded Mongeral Aegon I parsed its massive data. Then, I learned more about the findings and advice for working women from the surveys author, Catherine Collinson, CEO and president of TCRS. (The reports also called The New Social Contract: Achieving retirement equality for women.) And I asked Cindy Hounsell, president of the nonprofitWomens Institute for a Secure Retirementfor her thoughts. Finally, I had a candid conversation with Holly Lawrence, a 59-year-old freelance writer in Washington, D.C.who has written eloquently for Next Avenue about her financial struggles.She had some piercing opinions about the surveys results.

Our overarching goal for the report is to inspire and empower women to take action, said Collinson. My sense is that women need a vote of confidence. And small steps can lead to a big impact over time. For many women, taking the first step is the hardest.

So, to the news:

First, the bad news. Only 25% of the U.S. women surveyed believe theyre on course to achieve their retirement income needs and just 26% are confident theyll be able to retire with a comfortable lifestyle. By contrast, 40% of men say theyre on course to achieve their retirement income needs and 48% are confident about their retirement prospects.

It is alarming, Collinson said, speaking about the responses of women and the disparities with men.

Two reasons for American womens retirement insecurity, she noted, are thegender pay gap, making it harder to find spare cash to save for retirement (median income of women surveyed: $40,375; for men, $54,599) andcaregiving expensesthat cut into retirement savings.

Related: Why is it still so hard for women to save for retirement?

Almost every woman my age is having to think about how to take care of a parent or a millennial child if he or she cant get a job, said Lawrence.

She noted that the retirement insecurities the women expressed in the survey resonate with her.

Im definitely on the worried side, she told me. Im underemployed without savings and living below the poverty level. Ive felt lucky just to make my rent and utilities, with a smidgen in a low-earning savings account.

And now for the surveys so-so news: The researchers produce what they call the Aegon Retirement Readiness Index score and it has risen for U.S. women from 5.8 in 2014 to 6.1 in 2019. Collinson calls the 0.3 rise here a small increase. Her explanation for it: When the economy is doing better, people are more likely to be engaging in retirement planning and more optimistic about the long-term. (The index score rose for women globally, too, from 5.5 in 2014 to 5.8.)

But even a 6.1, Collinson noted, is just a medium retirement readiness score. Above 8 is high. The score for American men is now 7.1, up from 6.7 in 2014.

What could boost womens Retirement Readiness Score? A few things, according to Collinson.

More employers couldoffer retirement savings plans to their part-time workers.The survey found that women in America are nearly twice as likely to work part-time. And part-timers typically arent allowed to contribute to 401(k) or similar retirement plans where they work. Access to workplace savings plans has proven to be an effective way encouraging people to save, said Collinson.

Hounsell noted that the new federal SECURE Act will encourage employers to let part-timers put money into workplace retirement plans. That will make a difference, she said.

Financial advisers and the financial services industry could do more to assist women. For many financial advisers, training is deeply rooted in working with men, said Collinson. Theyrenot necessarily understanding or addressing the needs of womenand the life course of women in a way that is empowering and can lead to better decision-making.

Women can try to become what Collinson calls habitual savers.Just 50% of women in the survey said theyre habitual savers always saving for retirement. The percentage was lower for female boomers (45%) and even lower for Gen Xers (39%). About a third of boomer and Gen X women arent currently saving for retirement at all.

Habitual saving is one of the most important things we can do to self-fund a greater portion of our retirement, Collinson said. She acknowledged, however, that there are times when we cant save as much as wed like or at all due to pressing financial needs.

Lawrence told me she accumulated some savings years ago, when working in New York City. But that money dwindled due to high rents, her inability to find full-time work and medical emergency expenses.

Also see: Women now have more jobs than men but thats not necessarily sign of progress

Lawrence hopes to start saving again, though she detests when financial firms chide people for not putting away enough money for retirement. I glaze over when they say: You should have been here [with a large amount of savings] by now. She added that the study says its imperative women take greater control over their savings and retirement planning, and I certainly agree. But I think that type of sentence packs in some assumptions. If companies make people feel guilt and like theyve already lost before they get started saving for retirement, theyll never start.

Hounsell worries that possible cuts in Social Security and Medicare benefits toshore up those programswill only make retirement prospects more frightening for women and men. It is clearly a worry, she said, adding that thefoundation for womens retirement is still Social Security.

Shed like to see Washington make several changes to Social Security: higher benefits for widows; an anti-poverty minimum benefit that would not impact the income limits to qualify for Medicaid; bigger benefits starting at age 85 or 90, reflecting Americans longer lives and a caregiver earnings credit to offer retirement protection to women (and men) who have spent significant time as family caregivers.

One last finding in the Aegon survey that I think is worth noting. Only 23% of the U.S. women surveyed correctly answered three basic financial literacy questions dealing with interest rates, inflation and risk diversification; 36% of men did (thats better, but frankly not very impressive).

We have a tremendous opportunity to increase financial literacy in the U.S. and around the world, said Collinson. How can someone make informed decisions about retirement saving and investing over the long run without an understanding of the most basic concepts?

Her advice: Take advantage of retirement-saving educational tools and resources offered by your employer, if they exist. Read personal finance websites and publications. Enroll in a personal finance course at a local college.

Lawrence agreed and told me she has made a point of teaching herself about personal finances, watching videos and reading online media. She wants to see other women follow suit. Even if we dont have a 401(k) or savings, we need to start educating ourselves about these financial instruments, Lawrence said. Education is power.

Read more from the original source:
The good news and bad news about women and retirement and what can be done about it - MarketWatch

Many people dream of retiring early, or at least on time. But if you kick off that milestone unprepared, you'll regret pulling the trigger. And while delaying retirement may not be something you want to do, it's something you'll have to do if these three scenarios apply to you.

You need independent savings to live comfortably in retirement for one big reason: Social Security will only replace about 40% of the income you're used to, and that assumes you're an average earner. If you're an above-average earner, it will replace even less. Meanwhile, most seniors need 70% to 80% of their former paycheck to enjoy life and keep up with their bills, and retirement savings are generally what's needed to fill in that gap.

IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.

As a general rule of thumb, it's wise to enter retirement with about 10 times your ending salary socked away in an IRA or 401(k). If your current savings balance looks nothing like that, then you'll need to look at postponing retirement until you're able to get closer.

Say you're 65 years old and are itching to retire, but you currently earn $75,000 a year and only have $500,000 socked away. Though half a million dollars is certainly a respectable sum, it means you're still worlds away from the $750,000 should you be targeting. If that's the case, postponing retirement until age 70 will give you five more years to build wealth. And if you max out a 401(k) at today's annual limit for older workers -- $26,000 -- for five years, you'll wind up with a bit more than $750,000 if your investments in that account generate a relatively conservative 5% average annual return during that time.

Once you retire and move over to a fixed income, you may find that you're forced to cut back on certain expenses just to make ends meet. It therefore stands to reason that entering retirement with debt payments that monopolize your limited income is not a good thing to do at all.

If you're carrying debt, it pays to eliminate it before you retire, and you can do so by cutting back on expenses in your current budget or getting a second job to boost your earnings. This especially holds true if you're carrying credit card debt, which is generally considered the least healthy kind to have.

That said, if the only type of debt you have is mortgage debt, you don't necessarily need to postpone retirement until your home is paid off. Mortgage debt is regarded as one of the healthiest types of debt out there, and the interest you pay on your home loan can serve as a lucrative tax break.

Retirees are 40% more likely than workers to suffer from depression. The reason? They often find themselves hopelessly bored once they stop having a job to go to.

If you have no idea how you'll spend your days in retirement, then you're better off continuing to work until you figure it out. And if you know what you want to do with your time but can't afford it (say, you're hoping to travel extensively), work a few more years and boost your savings to make your goals more attainable. If you decide to retire without having a good sense of how you'll fill your days, you may find that your mental and physical health quickly start to deteriorate.

Postponing retirement may seem like a terrible thing to have to do, but remember, Americans are living longer these days, and if you push yourself to work until your late 60s or early 70s, there's a good chance you'll still enjoy a solid 20 years of retirement, if not more. And that way, you'll retire at a time when you're financially and emotionally ready.

Read the rest here:
If These 3 Things Apply to You, You Must Postpone Retirement - The Motley Fool

ROCKFORD (WREX) The Coronavirus threw stocks into turmoil the last few days, leading the Fed to lower interest rates.

Financial experts at Northwest Bank says that's good news for homeowners.

"We'd encourage all consumers to take a look at their current mortgage rates. For many, many folks, the time would be very favorable to come in, talk to your bank, talk to your mortgage people that you know and take a look at refinancing," said Tom Walsh, president of Northwest Bank.

On the flip side, when it comes to your retirement accounts, Walsh said you will likely see a dip in returns. That doesn't, however, mean you should panic.

"This move by the Fed I think is hopeful to stabilize the stock market as well and hopefully provide some calming affect, not only to the markets themselves, but to all of us who invest in the markets, and give us a little more confidence about our retirement savings," he said.

Go here to read the rest:
What the Fed's interest rate cuts means for your retirement - WREX-TV