Ladies,

You are making it sound like all men are a bunch of retards and/or chickens when it comes to investing. May I offer another more balanced view of the investing public. In our house, my wife makes me do the investing. Then she catches the negative news about how much the market dropped today on the TV. Then she tells me that she don't think we should have all that much money invested in the stock market. Does that sound a little familiar, only reversed?

"Erryl said investing just doesn't work with a co-team; someone has to be the manager, with advice from number 2, but someone HAS to be "the Decider"."

I have a lot of respect for Erryl and his investing advice, but I am not sure that I fully agree with him on this point. Why would it not work if a couple split the investing assets 50/50. She manages half within an allocation that suits her risk level and he manages the other half according to his risk level. If they each select the investment mix that suits them, then the two combined portfolios would be a little more risk than one wants and a little less risk than the other wants. I agree that this could add additional cost if splitting the investments caused you to pay a low balance fee. However, several of the above posters are retired and I would hope they are well beyond low balance fees.

I have suggested the above idea to my wife. If nothing else it would force her to learn a little more about investing, which could come in very handy if I am the first to die. It would also take a huge load off my mind if I knew that I was not going to mess up more than half our investment dollars.

Now for a little background so you can understand where I'm coming from. We both fully retired in 1994. We don't have another 40 years to play catch up. The month of June was not kind to our portfolio either. Gordon