Monday, November 16, 2009

Mid-November Economic Outlook

Some very smart women I know noted recently that some women financial columnists, not unlike some of their male counterparts, sway their commentary toward a political point of view.  In my opinion, that does justice to neither financial analysis, which one would hope would lead where the data follow, nor politics, which one would hope to be policy-driven.  Whatever our point of view, data show both parties have contributed to the deficits we currently have. 
In this column, I endeavor to give financial information as it is, and put it into some historical context, in order that we might understand our best individual financial strategies and which governmental policy decisions one would support which are consistent with a given outcome.
I.  Unemployment
The unemployment rate rose to 10.2% last month.  Anyone who read the July 13 column was expecting this rise, when comparing the recent recession to that in the early 1980's, wherein I noted "the average unemployment rate in the last five months of the recession ended Nov, 1982 was 10.18%, and it averaged 9.8% for the year after that recession was over." 
Although this was expected, it is not good news.  Coupled with the fact that consumer confidence is trending lower, it does not bode well for any sector of the ecomony reliant on discretionary spending.
II.  Other Economic Indicators
Here, the outlook is inconsistent. 
  • Housing is trending upward
  • Manufacturing is improving
  • Non-manufacturing sectors look questionable
  • Car sales have slowed after the "cash for clunkers" program ended
  • Discount and luxury retail sales are moving slightly upward
  • Corporate profits are improving
III.  Conclusion
Economy as a Whole
Given these general economic conditions, it is unlikely that the US Gross Domestic Product will match previous 3.5% growth in the fourth quater.  Given current data and trends, it appears that the year will close with a 2% - 2.5% quarter, and possible decline to 2% at the beginning of 2010.  As the year progresses, if pos-recession employment trends hold true, growth will likely rise to 3% as 2011 approaches.
Investors
Investor sentiment has been very positive of late.  My macroeconomic analysis includes 22 indicators, and of all of them, I think sentiment is most predictive.  It is, however, a negative corollary, i.e., the higher the sentiment, the worse the outcome.  It's not the bargain it was before it rose 50%, and I'll quote Warren Buffett, "Be fearful when others are greedy: be greedy when others are fearful." 
I've started hearing, "Get in before you miss the boat."  That always makes me want to jump ship.

Greed and Fear

I was just looking over a list of the cities where the highest percentage of homes was "under water," i.e., the mortgage is higher than the house is worth. 
And a light went on in my head.
I used to manage money.  I heard people throw around the words "greed and fear" almost every day.  When markets were expensive, EVERYBODY wanted to buy.  When they crashed, you couldn't give stock away.
So, back to mortgages, more than half of the people in these cities owe more on their houses than they can get from a buyer.
  • Bakersfield, CA
  • Riverside, CA
  • Fort Meyers, FL
  • Fairfield, CA
  • Orlando, FL
  • Reno, NV
  • Port St. Lucie, FL
  • Phoenix, AZ
  • Stockton, CA
  • Modesto, CA
  • Merced, CA
  • Las Vegas, NV
That's over 1.8 million households, with houses worth about what they were sometime between 1998 and 2003.  Some of these people had to buy their homes for a new job, etc.  But most, I imagine, saw housing prices go straight up during that period and bought or refinanced, thinking they could make money when they sold.  Now, unfortunately, the majority of people in these cities are on the "fear" side of "greed and fear."
The return on investment for investors in the stock and real estate market, over the long term, is very similar.  Apparently, so is the motivation to buy.  We know, as investors, we should strive to "buy low and sell high," or as Warren Buffett says, "Be greedy when others are fearful: be fearful when others are greedy."  But that's not what we do.
Back to the stock market, you may have noticed it's going up.  A lot.  Let's take a look at that for a moment.
First of all, it's up about 50% from its low.  It came down 50% from its high.  So, does that mean we're back where we started?  Far from it.
Since we're near Thanksgiving, let's use the example of pie.  If we put a pie on the table, and the kids eat half of it, it's easy to visualize what's left: half a pie.  If we increase that half a pie by 50%, we add a quarter of a pie.  We've got 3/4 of a pie, or 25% less than the full pie that we put on the table.
So, if the market is down 25% from its high, does that mean that it's cheap?
If we look at history, the average price investors pay for every dollar the S&P 500 earns is $15.82.  Right now, you'll pay about $21 for next year's earnings.  At the market low, you'd have paid under $11.  So, it's more expensive than its average price, but that's not surprising, since it's roared back over 50% from last March.  Does that make you feel greedy (I've got to get in before I miss the boat) or fearful (I should have bought when it was down, and now it's probably due for a correction).
The best way to feel, in my opinion is emotionless.  Being rational, rather than greedy or fearful, is the best strategy.  One very good strategy is to review your spending, put some money aside every month and invest it no matter where the market is, making sure, of course that what you invest is long term money.  That means you won't be using it for ten years or so.
This constant investing strategy is called "dollar cost averaging," and will result in you buying sometimes when the market is low, and sometimes when it's high.  Overall, you'll average out the peaks and valleys and invest rationally - for the long term.
Then you can leave greed and fear for the drama queens.

Saturday, November 7, 2009

Straight Talk About Debt

No issue is more politicized than deficit spending.  Blame abounds, but little insight is given into the components of our deficit, and what reasonable action must be taken.
For a history of US deficit spending, click here.  For an estimate of our current national debt, click here.

Facts

The stimulus package comprises approximately 10% of our current deficit. 
The majority of the deficit spending is comprised of:
  1. Unfunded liabilities from tax cuts made by Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003.  When enacted, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the tax cuts would increase budget deficits by $340 billion by 2008.  That effect has been exacerbated by the just ended recession (see 3. below).
  2. Unfunded liabilities from Medicare Drug Program.  When enacted, Medicare chief Mark B. McClellan said the drug package would cost $1.2 trillion between 2006 and 2015.
  3. The opportunity cost in GDP lost because of the recent recession which began in 2008.  Generally, annualized GDP grows just under 3%.  For the 18 months ended June 30, 2009, annualized GDP contracted just under 2% - or 4.6% less than average.   From the last quarter in 2008 to the second quarter of 2009, our $12 trillion economy shrank an aggregate of nearly $400 billion - representing a huge loss of tax revenue, loss of employment, etc.,
No credible economist would argue that the stimulus package was unnecessary.  It was begun by necessity in the previous administration and continued into the current one.  It is not the source of our economic problems, and allegations to the contrary are clearly false.

Growth of health care costs is unsustainable.

Left unchecked, growth in health care costs, currently about 17% of our GDP, will bankrupt the US.  That is not overstated to create alarm.  It is a fact.
Those who take the position that we cannot afford to pass comprehensive health care reform are wrong. 
Health care costs are increasing 6.2% per year.  At that rate, in 25 years health care cost will be almost 30% of GDP.  In 50 years, it will be almost 50%. 
It's the biggest problem we have, and we must solve it in order to address deficit spending in any meaningful way. 
To counteract any effort to address this problem which may threaten their profits,
  • $3.8 billion has been spent by the insurance and finance lobbyists and
  • $3.69 billion, by health industry lobbyists,
according to Open Secrets, a non-partisan group referenced recently in an article by the Wall St. Journal.  No industries have contributed more, by the way.

Medicare first.

Only one group represents more clout than the two lobby groups discussed above.  Retired persons.  Grey panthers.  AARP.  Lots of boomers with time to spare, and raised during a time where the promise of Medicare (enacted in 1965) was sacred.  Prior to the aforementioned unfunded drug program in 2006,
  • the number of Medicare recipients increased 2 times - from 20.4 million to 42.6 million 
  • the economy grew 12 times - from $1 trillion to $12 trillion
  • Medicare spending grew 47 times - from $7 billion to $339 billion
Big problem.  Anyone can see that costs are rising too fast.  So where should we start?
  1. Increasing information technology for patients
  2. Containing drug costs via use of generics
  3. Limiting malpractice judgements (thereby limiting doctor's insurance premiums)
  4. Opening group insurance rates to small business
  5. Providing equal tax benefits to private insurance as employer-provided insurance
  6. Lowering the deductible and raising the contribution limits on Health Savings Accounts
These policies would assure that the goal of cost containment would be foremost in the minds of legislators.  If we don't get this right, we go broke. 
It's as simple as that.

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Economic Highs and Lows

After a third quarter that dazzled like a diamond in the pile of coal our economy had been for the prior year and a half, we seem to be standing at a crossroads.  The stock market seems economically cheery, but most of us are not.  What's the best action to take in times like these?

I.  Define your goal in dollars

This sounds simple, but is not.  As a matter of fact, if it's done properly, it requires soul searching.  What is your economic goal?  Not your neighbors', not your friends', not your colleagues'.  Yours.
To know that answer is to define what makes you happy.  If you're doing the things that make you happy, then all you need to do is write down how much you spend on your happy life, and ensure you have the means to live it.
If you're not doing the things that bring you joy, however, this is a big job.  You need to visualize yourself in your fulfilled state, and calculate its economic cost.  That may take some time.
But, it's an investment well worth your effort.

II.  Identify your financial challenges
  • DEBT
Now, we're going to do the things that will get you to, or maintain your happy life.   If you're paying off debt, especially credit cards, your first step is easy.  Keep paying them down.  This is the singularly most treacherous obstacle to financial health.
  • INVESTING
But, what if you were on the verge of retirement, and all of a sudden, BOOM!  You heard the sound of your crashing 401(k).  Or, what about any of us that are on the path toward financial security, but not there yet?  What is the best course of action to take now?
First of all, as you have seen from the stock market's 60% rise since March, selling in a panic is a very bad idea.  If you did, you learned a valuable, if expensive lesson.  You sold when you should have been buying.  You learned why billionaire investor Warren Buffett says, "Be greedy when others are fearful, and fearful when others are greedy."
If you didn't sell, you're down 30% from the highs, and wish you'd invested more earlier in the year. I advised moving back into the markets slowly last November in order to "buy low."  The price of stocks is not as cheap as it was then.  So what do you do?
First, you put nothing into the market you need within the next five years.  You NEVER put money into the stock market that you need in the next five years.  The last year is a perfect example of why that is true.
Next, you realize that, at the last market top the price (or P/E) was 19.7, and at the last low, it was 10.3.  We're at 16.9 - not cheap.  So, it's very important that you think very carefully about buying stocks that have gone up in price very quickly, like Apple, Google and AIG.  A safer strategy right now is quality value stocks, like Microsoft, GE and Bank of America, whose prices have risen less quickly.
Finally, be judicious, but keep investing.  You're not buying on sale, so don't buy all at once.  Buy more when the market is down, and less on days when it's risen quickly, and put in a little every month rather than a lot all at once. 
But, keep in mind this is where your investments return more than inflation, and don't be deterred in saving for your goals.


III.  Watch your personal sentiment
The positive outlook for the US investor is very high right now.  Warren Buffett's advice is worth repeating here, "Be fearful when others are greedy."  Yet, the sentiment outside of Wall St. is decidedly more somber.
Here, we are discussing your personal sentiment.
No one is advocating a Pollyanna attitude.  Things are tough.
But, it is under our complete control how to face our tough situation.  One of my favorite stories about Thomas Edison included his reaction to a devastating fire that destroyed much of his expensive equipment and scientific notes.  Surveying the damage, he noted that, with "all the mistakes destroyed," he could begin anew with a fresh perspective.
Like him many women welcome less spending over the holidays, making gifts instead of buying them, focusing on spending time, rather than money on loved ones.  Some intend to keep these new rituals as part of their lives even after our financial challenges are behind us.
There is much to be gained by seeing obstacles as opportunities.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

A Woman's World Economic View

I. The United States
You know we've been in a recession. If you're employed, you're probably nervous about keeping your job. And if you're unemployed, you know we've been in recession better than I could ever tell you.

It's up to the National Bureau of Economic Research to provide the official beginning and ending dates for recessions, and if you're interested in how they do it, you can read about it here. For the rest of us, we saw a banking crisis start late last year, and while we may not have known the details of how it happened, we certainly knew why.

We saw every Jane, Jean and Judy buying houses they couldn't afford, getting a mortgage based on her ability to fog a mirror, and saw real estate prices zoom upward - like the Internet stock prices did in the late 1990's. A familiar pattern, with a familiar "pop" end the end of the bubble, accompanied by falling housing prices.

Then we really saw the force of this nasty recession.

Unlike the past, though, it is not the US that is leading the world out of recession. We're mired in debt and have failed to pass even one piece of financial reform legislation more than a year after causing a worldwide economic downturn. Although we appear to have stopped our economy from shrinking, we expect anemic growth at best for the next year or so.

II. Our Place in the World Economy

From the end of WWII through the remainder twentieth century, the US was the world's economic powerhouse. A significant reason for that was attributable to "good old Yankee ingenuity." During the war, we focused our best and brightest toward the war effort. Because military technology at that time had civilian application, our best minds transitioned easily from the war effort to consumer technology.

In the latter part of the 1900s, the US voted with our pocketbooks to stop looking for the union label and outsourced much of our manufacturing to countries who could produce our goods with lower employment costs. As a result, we became less a manufacturer and more a service provider to the world. Our techies were golden, and Wal-Mart, our merchant.

We imported much more than we exported, and became a debtor nation to our manufacturers, especially China. Thus, a great wealth transfer took place in the so-called "third world," where manufacturing jobs expanded feverishly. The Chinese built an enormous middle class from their export business.

Now, they finance about 25% of our national debt, which is the sum of all the deficits, or overspending we have accumulated every year - plus interest. For a look at our historic debt levels, read my July 15 article.

III. Popular Misconception

There is no doubt that our deficit is high. Without mitigating the seriousness of that situation, though, understanding China's reliance on the US as a major buyer of their manufactured goods is critically important as we evaluate our status as a debtor nation. Their population has accepted Communist rule with an unspoken financial contract that it expects to reap the benefits of newly acquired wealth. Should China stop buying our debt, which continues to be the highest quality in the world, it will also assist in further lessening the value of our dollar and likely fuel an inflationary fall into another recession.

Smart sellers don't bankrupt their main customers, and China is not stupid.

Further, while anyone can see that both China and India have been growing rapidly, we are not on the verge of losing our position as the primary financial powerhouse in the world. Much has been made of the meager savings rate in the States as compared with the thrifty Chinese. Upon closer look, however, it's apparent that the Chinese are thrifty largely because they cannot rely on their government to care for them. For example, the Chinese social security system currently has $94 per retiree, according to Steven Roach, head of Asian Operations at Morgan Stanley. Yes, our system also has problems, as the Social Security trust fund remains an IOU by Congress, but ours does have a long, unbroken history of payment. The Chinese are accustomed to caring for themselves during disasters, both natural and financial, and therefore tend to put more aside.

Last, while we attempt to once again define ourselves as the technological leader in such growth industries as "green technology," we have, without question, both the best institutions of higher learning that are necessary for cutting edge research and development, and an open door to the best minds in the world.

Having taught math-based analysis courses at UCLA, I can attest to the great difficulty I had during roll call in our first sessions. These unpronounceable names were from every corner of the world, and the university was delighted to have them.

Once again, a combination of our open door to great world minds, with Silicon Valley innovation may be our economic savior, moving from high technology to green energy, and selling it to the world.

IV. Future Course

Once we have economic stability and a health care policy that will not bankrupt our country, our next priority must be to get our financial house in order. Let's look what high debt does to the country by personalizing it a bit. Let's say you earn $60,000 per year. After taxes, you net $4,000 per month. Your mortgage payment is $1,500 per month, you have a second mortgage of $500 for major home repairs, your car payment is $600, and you have eight credit cards on which you pay an aggregate monthly payment of $850. That leaves you only $550 every month for food, clothes, medical, utilities, gasoline and car repairs, movies, and all other incidental expenses. You're in trouble. You're probably increasing your credit card debt every month, paying for necessities you couldn't afford after paying your debt. So, your credit card debt is growing, and you're barely hanging on.

Magnify that situation, and you have our Federal government. Yes, we had to pass the stimulus package to save ourselves from financial ruin. Yes, we have to address the unsustainably high cost of health care. But once that's done, we must cut expenses and pay down our debt, just like the person in our example, or risk the future of our economy.

We must also acknowledge that, within the next century, the US will be one of the world financial powerhouses, but not the only one. If China learns to cooperate with the rule of international trade, and if India streamlines its impossibly difficult tangle of red tape, than a less indebted US will share its position with them.

V. What We Do

What we do matters. We shopped at Wal-Mart. By doing so, we exported manufacturing jobs.

Now, we must demand that our deficits be reduced and focus on educating our young people to work in a much more competitive and complex world.

Education has always been a women's issue. We know that the answer to education is not primarily money. It's a contract between teachers, parents and children that excellence is expected, and failure is failure on a world order.

What we do matters.

Friday, October 23, 2009

The Female Retirement Dilemma

Issues involved with planning for retirement are different for women than they are for men.  And understanding them can be the difference between comfort and poverty in our old age.

I.  By Saving the Same Percentage, We Retire with Less Than Half Than Men

Let's look at the result of both men and women putting aside 10% of their earnings for retirement.

First, women current earn, on average $.80 for every dollar men earn.  So now, for every $.10 in men's retirement accounts, women have $.08 - 20% less.

Next, women spend an average of eleven years of their productive working lives as an unpaid caregiver for a family member.  Assuming a work life from college graduation at 22 to retirement at 65, that unpaid absence lessens our earning years by another 25%.  That reduction in lifetime earnings, added to the fact that we lower salaries, results in us having $.06 for every $.10 men save for retirement - or 40% less.

So, if we assume average annual earnings of $60,000 during their careers, men will save $258,000 and women, $154,800, assuming that those savings are invested in assets that keep up with inflation. 

At 65, a man will need ten years of retirement income from savings of $258,000.  Invested in assets that keep up with inflation and taxes, he will have $25,800 per year for ten years. 

A woman, because of her additional life expectancy will have a sixteen year retirement with savings of $154,800.  Invested in assets that keep up with inflation and taxes, she will have $9,675 per year.

No wonder twice as many women than men live in poverty.

II.  What To Do

First, homemakers who care for children or parents should have Spousal IRA accounts funded on their behalf every year.  Considering that replacing all the functions provided would total approximately $30 thousand per year (Source:  http://www.womenwork.org/resources/tipsheets/valuehomemaking.htm), it is only reasonable that your retirement is funded while you provide these services at no charge.

Second, women must learn to invest their retirement assets in a way that will maximize growth without taking an inordinate amount of risk.  The two long term investments that provide the highest return are stocks and real estate.

In the last few years, we have witnessed the volatility both these investments have.  But, let's put this into perspective.  The stock market high was in August, 2007.  Just over two years later, the market is down about 30% from its high.  There are two considerations we must make:
  • These are long term investments, intended for use in ten years or more.  In the 30+ years since I've been in the business, I've witnessed a years-long 50%+ correction in the 70's, a heart-stopping drop in the '80's, a precipitous fall in the 90's, the dot com bubble bursting in the early part of this decade and the current correction.  These are predictable, and those who have made wise stock investments and held them have fared far better, even at this point, from those who put their money in so-called "safe" investments, like money market accounts, Treasury Bills and insured savings accounts, which fail to stay ahead of inflation and taxes.  Note that there were two times billionaire investor Warren Buffett publicly admitted to buying stock in US companies:  once, during the correction in the 1970's; and the other, from March to year end, 2008.
  • Even at retirement, we have life expectancies that mandate we stay ahead of inflation and taxes, and therefore advise consideration of keeping at least a portion of our long term portfolios in capital markets.
  • Conversely, our short term (five years or less) cash flow needs must be kept in safe investments, so that our expenses are met and we are not tempted to sell our long term investments during market lows. 
Third, we've seen the outcome of abdicating responsibility for our financial lives with the likes of Madoff, Stanford, Enron, WorldCom and others.  There is no one who will take more of an interest in our financial health that ourselves.

It requires only that we gain the knowledge to take action and the willingness to provide for our future.

Sunday, October 18, 2009

Why Inflation is Worse for Women

Inflation is one of those vagaries of economics that most people hear enough to have an idea of what it means, without being able to define it precisely. Why it's important to know exactly what it is - particularly for women.


I. What It Is

Inflation is simply the measurement of how much prices rise every year. The most dramatic example of inflation is the price of houses. When I was about six years old, my parents bought a house in a suburb north of Los Angeles for $35,000. Even with the dramatic downward adjustment of house prices in that area within the last few years, that house is worth over $750,000. Over that time, the price of that home has grown at an annual rate of over 6.25%.

The way an annual growth rate works is

Price multiplied by Growth Rate equals New Price.

For example, the first year would be $35,000 X 6.25% = $2,187.50. New Price is $35,000 + $2,187.50 = $37,187.50.

The second year would be $37,187.50 X 6.25 = $2,324.22. $37,187.50 + $2,324.22 = $39,411.72. As you can see, the amount of growth in the second year is higher, because the New Price in the second year is higher.

This additional growth happens every year, and is called the effect of compounding.

II. Inflation and Women

Women live longer than men. Consequently, their investments have to last longer than men's do, in order for women to last for their longer lifespan. When you add to our longevity the fact that we earn less than men (currently about $.80 to the dollar) and average eleven years outside the workforce as non-paid caregivers for family members, it's easy to see that we start with less money, and need to make our money do more, or risk facing poverty in our old age.

III. The Risk of No Risk

The recent correction has been a stark reminder that short term volatility is a fact of life in the stock market. Many have said, "I'm never putting money into the market again. I'm sticking with safe investments." While it is certainly an understandable reaction, it is one that could risk women's long-term financial well being. Here's why.

The common economic barometer for a "no risk" investment is the one year Treasury Bill. Safety is assured, as repayment by the United States Treasury is considered certain. As of October 16, the one year Treasury Bill is paying .36%.

You must pay Federal taxes on the interest earned on your Treasury Bill. Married people earning less than $137,050 have a marginal tax rate of 25%.

Inflation over the last year has run about .31%.

So, your actual return for this "safe" investment is

.36%, Interest Rate, minus

.09% Tax Rate (25% tax on .36%), minus

.31% Inflation (the rise in costs over one year), equals

-.04%

After inflation and taxes (called "real return") you are behind where you started.

As a long term investment, this safe investment is a guaranteed loser.

IV. Some Other Types of Investments

We saw that the type of safety provided by Treasury Bills will actually lose ground over the long term. So, what's a girl to do?

A. Bonds

Bonds are loans. Treasury Bills are loans to the US government.

You can also loan money to corporations, who will pay you back, with interest. Corporate bonds are rated as to the certainty of repayment. "Investment grade" bonds are considered safe, and "junk bonds" are just what they sound like. High interest and low probability of repayment.

An investment grade bond is currently paying 5.62% for eight years.

5.62% Interest Rate, minus

1.41% Tax Rate (25% of 5.62%), minus

0.31% Inflation equals

3.90%

Your risk is that inflation will rise (as virtually every economist agrees it will) over the next eight years, and cut further into your return. But, at least you're staying ahead of inflation.

B. Stocks

Owning stock is owning a piece of a company. Owning stock in just one company is very risky, because if that company has financial problems you can lose some, or in cases like Enron and WorldCom, even all of your money.

Most people diversify their investments by owning many companies. One way of doing that is to invest in an index, like the Dow Jones Industrial Average or the Standard and Poor's 500 Average. Since the Dow has 30 stocks and the Standard and Poor's Index has 500, the latter is a more diversified investment, and is the measurement against which most fund managers base their performance.

Over very long periods of time, the stock market's return is about 9.8%, about 3.5% of which is dividend payments.

9.80% Return, minus

0.85% Tax Rate (3.5% dividend payment times 25%), minus

0.31% Inflation, equals

8.64%

There are a thousand provisos here. The growth in your investment (besides dividends) is taxable when you sell it. Current inflation rates are extraordinarily low, so your normalized return is more like 6.5% than 8.64%. But, in general, you get the point. Your money grows much faster in the market - EXCEPT there are predictable and certain big price fluctuations. You just saw one.

I've seen one in the 70's that took half the value of the market away in a long, grueling grind downward that lasted years. I saw one in 1987 that dropped far and fast. I saw one in the 90's. And there is this one.

So, short term money does not belong here. If you need it in five years, it doesn't belong here.

C. Real Estate

Real estate investments (not your home) have returns that are very similar to stocks. As you have seen, this too is a volatile enterprise. It's also highly specialized and takes a very large initial investment.

V. Risk and Return

If you know the risk, it is lessened. If you have a long term horizon, know that the stock market is VERY volatile and NEVER either sell in a panic - or invest money you need within five years - than you won't be spooked when the inevitable happens.

For those of us who are 50 and older, adding more bonds and lessening stock exposure is smart, as older women have less tolerance for price fluctuations than younger women. Some use the simple equation of subtracting their age from 100, and putting that amount in diversified stocks, and the rest in bonds.

VI. The Bottom Line

Let's say you're saving $7,500 a year for the next ten years for your retirement.  Using the examples provided above:

In a Treasury Bill, you'll end up with $74,865 (less than your original investment).
With Corporate Bonds, you'll have $89,628

With Stocks, you'll have $112,008.

Yes, there will be volatility in the stock market. But, with your long term horizon, you'll know better than to panic and sell, and help yourself not be one of the 13% of women living in poverty at age 75.