Friday, December 11, 2009, 4:40PM ET - U.S. Markets Closed.

Laura Rowley Money & Happiness

Laura Rowley, Money & Happiness

Double Bind: Savers on the Hook for Squanderers

by Laura Rowley

Email this Page IM this StoryBookmark this StoryAdd to your Del.icio.us accountDigg this StoryPrint this Story
Excellent (1115 Ratings)
4.106724/5
Posted on Wednesday, October 8, 2008, 12:00AM

Here's a tale of two homeowners, the Smiths and the Joneses. The Smiths are savers.

They have no revolving debt; 50 percent equity in their home; an emergency fund with six months' living expenses; a retirement plan to which they regularly contribute; and 529 college plans for their children's education.

The Joneses are spenders. They bought their home with no money down and have a subprime mortgage. They live from paycheck to paycheck; carry a balance of $10,000 on their credit cards; lease their cars; have no emergency fund; and have nothing saved for college or retirement.

A Tale of Two Lifestyles

The second household enjoys more material comforts, but the first household enjoys more security. Why should they care if their neighbors save -- or default on that mortgage and eventually go bust?

"We would all be better off if the neighbors had saved," says Ron Wilcox, professor at the Darden School of Business at the University of Virginia, and author of "Whatever Happened to Thrift?: Why Americans Don't Save and What to Do about It." He argues that the failure to save by many American families led to the mortgage meltdown and subsequent economic crisis -- and may be sowing the seeds for another disaster.

"The U.S. attracts a disproportionate amount of foreign capital because our government is stable, so interest rates remain low," Wilcox explains. "On the domestic side, way too many people have very little in the way of savings. These things worked together to produce the housing crisis. People were able to borrow cheap, and because they had no savings, often did not put a down payment on the home. When the price of the home goes down, it's much easier to walk away."

On the Hook

The savers are now financing the $700 billion bailout along with those who spent -- and may be forced to foot an even bigger bill as the baby boomers retire, says Wilcox, a former economist for the Securities and Exchange Commission who blogs here.

"If lots of people don't save and end up upon retirement being poorer than they would like to be, there will certainly be pressure to impose taxes on working people to more richly fund the retirements of individuals who have not saved," he says. "You'll see political pressure for wealth transfer -- and if you have saved responsibly, you'll be paying for people who have not."

Wilcox argues that savers who are dutifully contributing to their 401(k) plans face a real risk, because they won't pay taxes on the money until they retire. "It's easy for me to imagine 10 years from now a political candidate saying, ‘We have all these people with $3 million in their 401(k) plans and we need to impose taxes on those people and shore up Social Security for people who didn't have access to these 401(k)s,'" he says. "It's a big fat target for politicians." (And another disincentive to saving.)

Defining Savings

But let's back up a minute: Is it true that Americans aren't saving enough? Some economists argue that the official government measures of savings -- the National Income and Product Accounts (NIPA) and Flow of Fund (FOF) -- are flawed. Their definition of "savings" does not include home equity, capital gains, or the benefits from private pension plans such as 401(k)s, since some part of those benefits are paid for by capital gains. As the population ages and more people rely on pensions for income, critics suggest, the savings rate naturally declines.

"Those are valid criticisms," says Wilcox. "But there have been a number of attempts to scrub that data and reintroduce the things we think of as saving. If you put that data back in, you do find higher savings than NIPA suggests -- but it's not sufficient for most people to suffer a major loss like a medical bill, or to take care of themselves in retirement."

So what's at the heart of the U.S. savings problem? Wilcox dismisses the usual suspects -- such as advertising and easy access to consumer credit -- as too simplistic, arguing that the influence of advertising has been decried since Victorian times, and credit was invented more than a millennium earlier. (The Greeks and Romans used credit extensively to finance far-flung commercial ventures and personal consumption -- with decidedly harsher consequences: Debtors who defaulted were sold into slavery.)

Wealth Disparity and he Decline of Saving

Instead, Wilcox points to the widening gap between rich and poor. The concentration of income among the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans has roughly doubled in the last 30 years. In 2004, for example, the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans enjoyed a 12.5 percent increase in income, while the bottom 99 percent gained only 1.5 percent. (The gap is likely wider, since capital gains are excluded.)

As a result of social and geographic mobility, most individuals have a consumption reference group that comprises people with varying amounts of income. Those at the top shift our frames of reference (something Robert Frank also argues in his book "Falling Behind."

"As income disparities accelerate, I observe some people in my reference group who seem to be able to afford nice things that I do not currently have," Wilcox writes. "Because this observation is a one-sided event, and individuals may exaggerate their own consumption when speaking with others, disparities in remembered consumption accelerate even more quickly than actual disparities."

The Extravagance of Memory

Combine the bragging of increasingly wealthy neighbors with the psychology of memory, and you have people not just competing with the Joneses, but competing with their embellished memories of the luxuries the Joneses enjoy.

"The psychological trick people play on themselves is that when they view consumption, they tend to concentrate on idealized consumption," says Wilcox, adding that the psychology of arousal comes into play (in a mental, not sexual context). Research has found that brain activity increases when we see something novel or unexpected.

"When we are aroused mentally, we deal with information differently," Wilcox explains. "People's memories are stronger. We take as anchor points what people around us consume -- we remember things we like and don't like, and then construct an idea of what is appropriate to consume. What the memory constructs is more extravagant."

Consumerism Beyond Capability

In his book, Wilcox proposes a number of private and public initiatives to boost savings rates. But given that no one expects either income disparity or human psychology to radically change in the future, is there any moral appeal that might convince spenders to save?

"Spending more money than you have -- consumerism beyond capability to buy -- it seems to me that's a moral vice," Wilcox asserts. "There are reasonable uses of debt, but lifestyle debt is not one of them. Who ends up paying the bills? Either you pay the bills down the road, or if you seriously mismanage, someone ends up paying the bills for you -- you need someone to bail you out. I'm hard pressed to think that's a virtuous way to live life."

So are the savers footing the $700 billion bailout tab.

Email this Page IM this StoryBookmark this StoryAdd to your Del.icio.us accountDigg this StoryPrint this Story

Rate This story

Excellent (1115 Ratings)
4/5
Sign-in to rate!

807 Comments

Showing comments 6-35 of 807<< PreviousNext >>
Sort: first to last

  • Ahorn - Thursday, October 30, 2008, 10:33PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    (If someone else already mentioned this, please excuse). Another item which needs to be discussed are the disincentives to save. In countries such as Germany, interest earned on savings accounts does not get taxed, at least up to a certain amount. This encourages people to save, and creates capital to help keep the economy going. Unfortunately in the US, not only do we get meager interest on savings, money market and other accounts, but that little bit gets taxed starting with the first dollar. If the government authorities were sensible about strengthening the economy and creating more jobs, eliminating taxes on the first $5,000 or so of interest would provide a goood incentive for people to save. And likewise, mortgage deductions should be limited to discourage excessively expensive housing, e.g, no deductions for interest on mortgage amounts over $400,000.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Saturday, October 18, 2008, 2:01AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    It is sad that Americans are poor savers. It is also unfortunate that those who do save are not rewarded. I am on fixed income and rely on savings interest to supplement my retirement income. However whenever the market struggles, the Fed lowerers interest rates to "stimulate" the economy and that LOWERS MY INCOME!! That is not fair to those that are savers. Now with this bailout, guess who will pay? The responsible savers will.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Friday, October 17, 2008, 10:49PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    Next thing you know, a Roth will be taxed on the back end as well. It won't matter if you have an er matching contribution because govt. will "spread the wealth around" anyway. The whole reason we are in this mess as a country is because our govt. encourages us to spend. What a load! Savers unite...and leave the country!

  • vinodg - Friday, October 17, 2008, 6:17PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    lets all save for the rainy day

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Friday, October 17, 2008, 4:51PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    GOD bless us all, watch over us and keep us safe. Because this is only the beginning.

  • Sledge - Friday, October 17, 2008, 3:14PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    the problem stems from the idiots that forced the policy of "everybody must be allowed credit" whether or not they qualified. now everyone from the bank to the wellfare mammy (no shortage of those) are cryin....F em all.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Friday, October 17, 2008, 9:03AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    Sounds exactly like what Obamas got in mind.

  • K.K. - Friday, October 17, 2008, 12:22AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    We want to be the Smiths but God help us we're the Joneses and there's no way out for us. Too far in debt to even consider a "six months living expense" cushion. It's nobody's fault but ours...but there it is.

  • Jimbo - Thursday, October 16, 2008, 3:05PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    I've been thinking about this problem for some time as a saver, well before the scum leading the sub-prime charge gathered their millions. My question, how do we safely move savings off-shore and out of the reach of the IRS?

  • Adrian - Thursday, October 16, 2008, 12:35PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    This Bail Out is Full of Pork. Lets keep the saving rate at zero. Ok, that is going to help?

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday, October 16, 2008, 12:33PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    Spending beyond ones income should not be condoned by bailouts by government or any other source. You make your own bed you should sleep in it.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday, October 16, 2008, 12:12PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    Went to the Hospital today to visit a friend. That made me think about this article. The people that eat and lead unhealthy lifestyles are costing those with healthy lifestyles more money in the form of taxes and health care costs. That is part of living in a society. As a society, shouldn't we encourage fiscal responsibility, good health, strong education and all the good things that make the country better. It is election time and not many politicians are saying the we need to spend less.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday, October 16, 2008, 11:39AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    i have been saving since the Reagan Administration. Even after his horrible policies made interest rates drop, I kept saving. After Bush's policies made interest rates drop to 2% or even less, I kept saving. I am not in debt, I own my car, my house and have money in the bank. Sometimes its a good idea to buck the trend and NOT listen to what the finance industry recommends.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 11:32PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    Is this some of the voodoo economics left over from Reagan? How are the banks out of money with all the fees, the interest rates, the enormous number of credit cards etc? Now they want more money. They did not share the profits from all the phoney loans, why do they want to share the losses? The politicians who allowed all the deregulation, the tax incentives to take commerce overseas, to underfund all the retirement accounts, to screw the middle class who is being squeezed out of existence are at fault. Let the politicians fund the bail out with their money, not ours.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 10:55PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    Don't over spend, dave your money, and retire early. Can somebody explain to me why somebody who over extended themselves on a house, thinking that it would continue to appreciate in value 10% every year, needs to be helped in any way? How about this idea? First give all the people that lost monney in their 401K retirement plans their monsy back. Then ep out those "poor" home owners. Until that is done, I do not care if every one of them becomes homeless. I'm tired of doing the right thing, while overspenders get forgiven.

  • Once a patriot - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 9:07PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    The experts say only 5% are delinquent....if what is happening now with that, what will happen when 15-20% default as reported?? There are as many OPT-A, junk home loans going to reset in 2009 as this year...Prices going up?...I think not,and unemployment skyrocketing. They are pumping TRILLIONS in the market in one month...more to continue. Got gold? of course that is IF you can find it, as almost every retail outlet is sold out! What a mess,and all for some short term gains for very few of our leaders,and CEO's...

  • Chrisb - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 6:24PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    Two remarks: 1. People do not save mainly because it does not pay to save. Interest rates are very low. If you put your money in a saving account, the inflation will burn them away. Even in a CD they will melt away, because CDs give about 3.5% and the real inflation is twice that. As a matter of fact, we have a negative interest rate now because of the inflation. As the article explains, if you save you are a loser. 2. Trickle down economics does not work any more. It worked before, but not any more. it stopped working about 10 years ago. The money in the big companies that are saved from taxes do trickle down, but they trickle down to China and India - the big corporations are moving away. They do not invest in America any more - it is more profitable to invest in China and India. American workers are too expensive.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 6:22PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    The time when Reagan instituted trickle down economics in the 80's is very different from today. How many jobs have gone overseas since Reagan was President? How much more power in terms of salary negotiations do employers have over workers since this change? Voting for another Republican like McCain would be a foolish thing for any member of the middle class to do. As someone else stated Reagan and W. Bush left and will leave huge deficits when they left or will leave office. If we are to continue the Bush tax cuts who is going to pay for all Bush's spending? Trickle down economics will not have the same effects today as it had in the 80's. We are later in the stages of Globalization and the rich could invest money they received from tax breaks anywhere. Look what the Bush tax cuts have done for the country for the past eight years, and now McCain wants to extend them. There is a way to experience job growth when you raise taxes. You could offer tax incentives to hire AMERICAN WORKERS and only AMERICAN WORKERS. The way the tax cuts are currently set up corporations receive tax incentives to send Americans' jobs overseas. Why would anyone want to vote to continue such a policy? American tax breaks have been trickling into emerging markets and America's decline is surely proof of that. Don't listen to McCain's country first lies. It should be edited to read America's rich first, country if there is anything left.

  • Marty - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 4:31PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    We have been savers and I can see what Laura is forecasting for us - a bleak future indeed where the government uses savers like us as ATM machines to fund its wealth transfer schemes. As long as the democrats contral the Senate, the Congress and the Presidency (as they are about to do), heaven help us all - they are devising hundreds to ways to pick our pockets to fund the social programs that enrich their power base. I am as pessimistic about our future in America as I have ever been.

  • Robert - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 3:47PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Typical garbage from media pundit. Always leave out the facts that would ruin a good story. You never mention the entitlement programs that 40% of Americans have been milking for the last thirty years. Why bother to save when Uncle Sugar will subsidize your food, medical, rent and childcare while you sit in the bar and drink beer and eat out. Get a Grip.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 3:41PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    " scoff at people blaming government completely for all this mess. It is a combination of a lot of factors, but what the author seems to be saying is that most people have no self control when it comes to spending. (obviously I am a saver - I've even been ridiculed for being "cheap") Homeownership is not a right, it is a responsibility. I was outraged when I saw a story about someone who was in foreclosure, and the bank reduced her rate from 7% to 4.8%. How ridiculous! I pay my bills and can't get a rate that low! Seems to me that a LOT of people are now being rewarded for their irresponsibility. Hmmm... maybe if all of us savers rebelled, stopped making our mortgage payments.... started sticking our hands out and begging... maybe then things would change. But I doubt it. Maybe us savers need to look into offshore accounts before the spenders dip further into our pockets to support their habits." AMEN, BROTHER!!! Funny, Michelle Obama is finally proud, just as I am deeply ashamed to be an American. I can't wait to retire outside the country and let these pork barrel polits pork themselves! VOTE GRIP! Kick everyone who voted for this $850Billion grand larceny onto unemployment. Coincidence that the week after they pass the graft bill is the worst in market history, including the depression era? No way, Jose!

  • skeptical - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 3:18PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    Why save?, your dollar will have less purchasing power tomorrow. The fed came into existance in 1913 and in the last 95 years the dollar has declined 95%. What happens in five more years?, game over? Reality is, 100k pay is still 5k, and 250k house is still 12.5k. " In God We Trust" is absolute truth, you can't trust anything else.

  • TFL - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 2:57PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    I think some have missed the point of the article. Americans do not save, they spend. And Reagan's trickle down economics is just further proof. He did not cut spending. Reagan brought down interest rates and put people to work sure but he did it by borrowing, which is the point of the article. He stopped printing money which why interest rates came down but he did not stop spending. Regan left office with a huge deficit for later generations to pay. Sounds like the same story for W and he has not created many jobs at all and might have a negative number by the time he leaves office.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 2:25PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    Good article. coleK and others: The greed of Wall Street is unquestionable. They should all die of gonorrhea and rot in hell. But do propose that this greed makes it impossible for the working class to save?! Absolutely ridiculous! Maybe not everyone has a great 401(k) with employer matching, but the same people who lack these helpful, unnecessary savings vehicles tend to be the ones buying flat-screen TVs on credit and leasing cars. As to the point about spenders creating jobs, this is a good one. However, I would respond by asking whether those working in the frivolous jobs enabled by unbridled consumerism might still have jobs if responsible citizens drove the market toward more substantive business (i.e., novel drugs rather than chihuahua-toting handbags).

  • ColeK - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 1:34PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    What a load of crap - blaming working people for the latest big time Wall St rip off. 50 years ago people got retirement pension from work. At the same time the upper classes pay was more in proportion to the average working man. When CEOS loot 111 million dollars out of a company for themselves alone, it is no wonder the company goes bust, the investors sink, and no one can save anything. Having already looted and smoked every workers pension years, ago, corporate America is working on removing health care benefits and Social security. Then they can use that to go party in Bermuda on our dime. The so-called economic crisis can easily be fixed with investigation and prosecution, but that's not likely to happen so long as the foxes are investigating the hen house raid.

  • Jeff B - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 12:12PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    bobbyrib - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 7:06AM ET Report Abuse Overall: 5/5 To the Yahoo Finance User who called Obama a socialist: Yeah, John McCain is the answer to what currently ails this country. He will lower taxes for the rich (which will do little for the middle class), _____________ Maybe if the "middle class" started to save and invest, they would have the same advantage. I think there are plenty of middle class that have 401ks and Roth IRAs that would benefit. Stop bashing the rich. The "rich" employ thousands of people. If you are tired of being middle class, get a better education and job.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 11:52AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Good article. All you ever hear about is the widening gap between the rich and poor but never about the widening gap between the savers and spenders.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 10:32AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    I loved the article! Finally - someone points out how financially responsible citizens are being penalized and forced to bail out irresponsible citizens. Our family was against the bailout bill and was hoping McCain, representing conservatives, would have done the same. This bill and the prior acquisitions of lending organizations has pushed the U.S. to be 60% socialist and is a complete slap in the face of free markets and capitalism. It's like giving a blank check irresponsible little brother when you know he won't use it wisely or learn from his prior mistakes. I've read the posts below relating to which presidential candidate would be best to help our economy - the answer is clear: Look at History - What did Reagan do after he beat out Carter?!?! When Reagan took office - interest was 21%, 8 million jobs were lost in 2 years prior, Unemployment was in double digits. Pres. Reagan lowered taxes on corporations and businesses, he cut government spending, he created over 21 million jobs. His economic plan is similar to McCain's. Trickle down economics work. The top 10% wealthiest people in US pay 70% of the current tax bill as it stands. How did these people get that money - they own businesses, they have stocks, they invested in their futures. If you penalize them like Sen. Obama wants to, they will cut jobs and will find tax havens to cheat their way out of paying increased taxes. I'm sure a lot of corporations would raise prices to pass on excessive tax increases to consumers. Trickle up and wealth reallocation sounds good to the common uneducated person, but yields only short term benefits and does not teach people to invest in themselves. They'll blow through tax credits and give it all back to the businesses being penalized for being successful. Come on people, there is not a single goverment program that has worked (ex. social security). This is America - let's not penalize the dream of being free to shape your own future and pursue success. The Government can't take care of you and let you keep your inner pride- look at why we revolted against England's tax system during the revolution. There are so many opportunities out there right now for new businesses and the green energy industry. America needs to reinvest in itself. We've been the world's leader in innovation and productivity - let's continue the tradition and vote for politicians that believe in that and moral responsibility no matter what party. My family is rooting for McCain/Palin for President, because we feel Washington needs a clean sweep and we are sick of Congress playing their partisian games when it comes to spending our tax money.

  • Carl - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 8:15AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    Very good article, but it's not so simple. If it weren't for people like the Smiths, spending recklessly, the people like the Joneses might not have jobs.

  • BobR - Wednesday, October 15, 2008, 7:06AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    To the Yahoo Finance User who called Obama a socialist: Yeah, John McCain is the answer to what currently ails this country. He will lower taxes for the rich (which will do little for the middle class), not tax worker's unemployment (which is actually a good idea), continue to fight the war in Iraq, and somehow balance the budget. Fighting a war in Iraq, cutting taxes for the rich and balancing the budget makes me question who the real "messiah" is. If you believe anything coming out of McCain's desperate mouth right now I have several bridges to sell you. While Obama may not be perfect (I don't support the bailouts) he is a lot better of a solution for this country's problems than John (I'll say anything to get elected) McCain. Cutting taxes for the rich and expecting trickle down economics to save this country's economy will have a different effect (if trickle down economics ever had one) on this country since we took up the cause of Globalization in the 90's. Evidentially to Paulson "protectionist policies" are not the answer to our country's problems, but billions of dollars of bailouts (that add up to trillions) are the answer while keeping taxes low on the rich. So if taxes are low on the rich, who will pay for these bailouts? If you are now thinking the middle class you are correct. I can't believe so called conservatives voted a communist in the white house. Also McCain proposed to help responsible homeowners (who are in legitimate trouble with the current economic crisis) which would lead to an even bigger bailout than the trillions we all ready sunk into the bailout to help the banks and the rich. That makes me question who the real socialist is. This country will not have any money left for any national healthcare system next year.

Showing comments 6-35 of 807<< PreviousNext >>
The columns, articles, message board posts and any other features provided on Yahoo! Finance are provided for personal finance and investment information and are not to be construed as investment advice. Under no circumstances does the information in this content represent a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security. The views and opinions expressed in an article or column are the author's own and not necessarily those of Yahoo! and there is no implied endorsement by Yahoo! of any advice or trading strategy.

More From Laura Rowley

Money & Happiness

Discover the secrets to financial happiness. Laura's book offers practical tools and positive strategies to create "the good life" in a meaningful way.

More about Money & Happiness

Learn to identify your values, banish debt, start saving, and investing; plus Laura's favorite online resources.

Order your copy of Money & Happiness today and boost your financial well-being!

More from Yahoo! Sources

  • CNN Money
  • Consumer Reports
  • Kiplinger
  • The Motley Fool
  • Business Week
  • Wall Street Journal

Historical chart data and daily updates provided by Commodity Systems, Inc. (CSI). International historical chart data and daily updates provided by Morningstar, Inc. Fundamental company data provided by Capital IQ. Quotes and other information supplied by independent providers identified on the Yahoo! Finance partner page. Quotes are updated automatically, but will be turned off after 25 minutes of inactivity. Quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes. Real-Time continuous streaming quotes are available through our premium service. You may turn streaming quotes on or off. All information provided "as is" for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes or advice. Neither Yahoo! nor any of independent providers is liable for any informational errors, incompleteness, or delays, or for any actions taken in reliance on information contained herein. By accessing the Yahoo! site, you agree not to redistribute the information found therein.

Yahoo! Answers is provided for informational purposes only, and no Q&A is intended for trading or investing purposes. Yahoo! shall not be responsible or liable for the accuracy, usefulness or availability of any Q&A information, and shall not be responsible or liable for any trading or investment decisions based on such information. View Complete Answers Disclaimer.