Tim Walz doesn't own any stocks: What to know about Kamala Harris' running mate's personal finances - eviltoast
  • Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota is a man of relatively modest means, according to financial disclosures.
  • In fact, he doesn’t own a single stock.
  • Like other members of Congress, Walz even slept in his Capitol Hill office for some time.
  • dan@upvote.au
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    3 months ago

    Do you have a retirement account like a 401k or IRA? That’s almost certainly invested in stock.

        • SpermHowitzer@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          Worth keeping in mind his pension is definitely in stocks (and other investments too, of course). So he doesn’t own stocks, but the portion of the pension he owns is stocks.

    • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I do (2 in fact) and they’re locked in. I can’t do anything with them or to them except add more money (that I don’t have).

      I’d like to know who made the rule that RRSPs, 401Ks, etc MUST be invested in the stock market instead of GICs or other forms of investment. Because if I had a choice I wouldn’t have one red cent in stocks.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        MUST be invested in the stock market

        You can invest in bonds instead if you want to. Less risk, less reward.

        I’m in my 30s so my investment portfolio is around 90% stocks and 10% bonds at the moment.

        • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          According to the terms (both are from former employers) the stock market is it. I have no other options.

          • JackbyDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            That doesn’t sound right, are you sure? The choice for investing in the bonds usually looks very similar to the others. Not saying you’re wrong, just that it is peculiar.

            • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              I’m Canadian, so when I transferred one of the RRSPs to my bank after I left that job, the bank showed me the paperwork that stated the RRSP had to be invested in stocks.

              • JackbyDev@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Ah, okay. I don’t know how it works in Canada. In the US our 401ks are more like mutual funds. We have a few options we can choose. Many of them track popular stock indices (like S&P 500). Our IRAs can invest directly into stocks though.

                I also don’t know if you have to invest in the Canadian stock market or can invest in any, but there are definitely ETFs (which you buy and sell as stocks) that track bonds. So even if you can’t directly get bonds you can still essentially get bonds.

                The scope of this is a little more in depth than I’m prepared to write in a Lemmy comment right now, but you can get many different types of bonds as ETFs. You can get target date ones that are the closest to the traditional bond experience (guaranteed return if you hold until maturation). You can get ETFs that are a mix of government bonds. You can even get ones that are a mix of all types of bonds (including corporate bonds).

                All that to say, if you must invest “in stocks” you can still probably get some that are close to bonds.