ECONOMIC: Paradoxes all Financial Advisors Should Know

BY DR. DAVID EDWARD MARCINKO MBA MEd CMP™

SPONSOR: http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com

SPONSOR: http://www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org

***

***

A paradox is a logic and self-contradictory statement or a statement that runs contrary to one’s expectation. It is a statement that, despite apparently valid reasoning from true or apparently true premises, leads to a seemingly self-contradictory or a logically unacceptable conclusion. A paradox usually involves contradictory-yet-interrelated elements that exist simultaneously and persist over time. They result in “persistent contradiction between interdependent elements” leading to a lasting “unity of opposites”.

***

And so, as we plan for our financial future thru a New Year Resolution for 2025, it’s helpful to be cognizant of these paradoxes. While there’s nothing we can do to control or change them, there is great value in being aware of them, so we can approach them with the right tools and the right mindset.

According to Adam Grossman, here are seven [7] of the paradoxes that can bedevil financial decision-making, clients and financial advisors, alike:

  1. There’s the paradox that all of the greatest fortunes—Carnegie, Rockefeller, Buffett, Gates—have been made by owning just one stock. And yet the best advice for individual investors is to do the opposite: to own broadly diversified index funds. More: https://tinyurl.com/285vftx4
  2. There’s the paradox that the stock market may appear over valued and yet it could become even more overvalued before it eventually declines. And when it does decline, it may be to a level that is even higher than where it is today.
  3. There’s the paradox that we make plans based on our understanding of the rules—and yet Congress can change the rules on us at any time, as the recent 2024 election results attest.
  4. There’s the paradox that we base our plans on historical averages—average stock market returns, average interest rates, average inflation rates and so on—and yet we only lead one life, so none of us will experience the average.
  5. There’s the paradox that we continue to be attracted to the prestige of high-cost colleges, even though rational analysis that looks at return on investment tells us that lower-cost state schools are usually the better bet.
  6. There’s the paradox that early retirement seems so appealing—and has even turned into a movement—and yet the reality of early retirement suggests that we might be better off staying at our desks.
  7. There’s the paradox that retirees’ worst fear is outliving their money and yet few choose the financial product that is purpose-built to solve that problem: the single-premium immediate annuity.

CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/0826102549

How should you respond to these paradoxes? As you plan for your financial future, embrace the concept of “loosely held views.”

In other words, make financial plans, but continuously update your views, question your assumptions and rethink your priorities.

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Subscribe Today!

***

***

PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE: The Paradox

BY DR. DAVID EDWARD MARCINKO MBA MEd CMP

Sponsor: http://www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org

***

***

Classic Definition: Despite rising costs, health care often is of poor quality. Evidence from a classic medical improvement outcomes study assessed care of patients with several chronic diseases. This study found that patients’ functional health status outcomes are similar to care rendered by specialists and generalists but that generalists use far fewer resources. Similar outcome at lower cost represents higher value.

Modern Circumstance: Current solutions to improving care quality may do more harm than good if they focus more on diseases than on people. Efforts to improve the parts (evidence-based care of specific diseases) may not necessarily improve the whole (the health of people and populations).

Expanding access to specialty care, for example, has been proposed as both a source of and a solution for deficiencies in quality of care. Primary care is touted as an essential building block of a high-value health care system even as it is undermined by systems attempting to improve the quality, effectiveness, and value of their health care..

Paradox Example: The above contradictions plague improvement efforts in health care systems around the world, particularly the United States The paradox is that compared with specialty care or with systems dominated by specialty medical care, primary care is associated with the following: (1) poorer quality care for individual diseases, yet (2) similar functional health status at lower cost for people with chronic disease, and (3) better quality, better health, greater health  equity and lower costs for whole peoples and populations.

And so, this contradiction plagues improvement efforts in health care systems around the world, particularly the United States.

Cite: Kurt Stange MD PhD and Robert Ferrer MD MPH

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

***

***

GIBSON’S PARADOX: Inaccurate Economic Observations

Why were interest rates and prices correlated?

By Staff Reporters

SPONSOR: http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com

***

***

Gibson’s paradox is based on an economic observation made by British economist Alfred Herbert Gibson regarding the positive correlation between interest rates and wholesale price levels. John Maynard Keynes later called this relationship a paradox because he claimed that it could not be explained by existing economic theories.

CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/0826102549

There have been possible explanations raised by economists to solve Gibson’s paradox over the decades. But as long as the relationship between interest rates and prices remains artificially de-linked, there may not be enough interest by today’s macro-economists to pursue it any further.

In the end, Gibson’s paradox was neither Gibson’s (having been previously discovered by others) nor a true paradox (as plausible explanations already existed at the time of Keynes’s writing and more have been explored since) and is of little interest beyond being a historical footnote to the gold standard era.

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

***

***

California Passes Bill Regulating Private Equity Deals

By Health Capital Consultants, LLC

***

***

On September 28th, 2024, California Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed Assembly Bill (AB) 3129, which sought to regulate private equity (PE) transactions involving healthcare organizations by requiring certain transactions to be reviewed by, and to receive approval from, the California Attorney General (AG).

In his veto message, Governor Newsom stated that the state’s Office of Health Care Affordability (OHCA), established in 2022, has the power to review and evaluate healthcare transactions (including the ones at issue in AB 3129). While OHCA does not have the power to block proposed transactions, as the AG would have had under AB 3129, it can refer transactions to the AG for further examination. Put simply, the governor’s veto seems to stem from concern that taking power away from the newly-created OHCA could muddy the waters in healthcare transaction regulation.

While there is a possibility that the California legislature could override Governor Newsom’s veto, it appears unlikely as of the publication of this Alert. However, the overall popularity of this bill in the legislature (as evidenced by the fairly wide margins with which it passed) indicates that PE groups looking to transact in the healthcare space – both in California and across the U.S. – should be on high alert, as regulators are increasingly turning their focus on the role of PE in healthcare.

CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/0826102549

For more information on AB 3129, as well as the status of state and federal regulation of PE, see the September 2024 Health Capital Topics article entitled, California Passes Bill Regulating Private Equity Deals.”

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

***

***