What caught my eye this week.
Not one but two must-read articles for you this week. Less than ideal now the sun is finally showing its face, I know.
The first comes from the ever-reliable Portfolio Charts.
Inspired by the many criticisms that ‘safe’ withdrawal rate (SWR) research has overwhelmingly focused on US returns, Portfolio Charts conducted an incredibly deep dive into the SWRs of other countries – and also the myriad different asset allocation mixes you could have chosen to achieve them.
It’s a valuable read. Not because I think anybody should load up on any particular asset allocation that proved successful in the past – we do not know the future – but for the illustration of:
- How a lot of different assets can work together to deliver a decent SWR
- How, nevertheless, the resultant SWRs still varied quite widely
Today everybody should really have at least a somewhat globally diversified retirement portfolio. So to that extent, individual country returns are moot.
The point rather is to see again why global diversification is so valuable in the first place.
Unless you do have a perfect crystal ball, of course. In which case buy the best and forget the rest!
(Spoiler: you don’t have a crystal ball).
It was different in their day
Secondly, a powerful article from John Burn-Murdoch on the growing wealth inequality that’s caused by wildly different outcomes when it comes to inheritance and property.
For more than 15 years I’ve been arguing on Monevator that inheritance taxes should be far higher to curb us from inching back into a feudal state. While many childless people get the point, those with biologically-activated selfish genes tend to say “maybe, but not my kids”.
I understand people love their children and want to do whatever they can for them. Also that preventing that can seem draconian and punitive.
But where do we want to end up as a society?
Well, here’s where we’re going:

As you can see, boomer parents – who rage indignantly about being ‘taxed twice’ when they die and their children get something for nothing – grew up in a different world.
Not only had many started building property wealth by their 30s, but the gap between the average boomer and those who were really making progress with property was also far narrower.
Burn-Murdoch notes:
The average millennial still has zero housing wealth at a point where the average boomer had been building equity in their first home for several years.
But the top 10% of thirtysomethings have £300,000 of property wealth to their names, almost triple where the wealthiest boomers were at the same age.
These differentials are the result of wealth becoming increasingly hereditary:
Bee Boileau and David Sturrock at the Institute for Fiscal Studies found that more than a third of young UK homeowners received help from family.
Even among those getting assistance there are huge disparities, with the most fortunate 10th each receiving £170,000, compared with the average gift of £25,000.
I suppose it’s possible this is a one-time enrichment caused by the spectacularly lucky lives of the Boomer generation in the US, UK, and Europe. There’s signs that the generational wealth escalator has flatlined.
So perhaps the feudalisation is a one-off event? Bad, in my view, but maybe it won’t get worse.
The robber barons next door
But what if it does get worse?
Do we really want to be in a situation in 30 years where it almost doesn’t matter where you study, what job you get, or how hard you work – for the average person whether you can buy a nice home is not a reflection of your efforts and talent but how well your grandparents did with property in the 1980s?
I’d tax the recipients of inheritances at their highest rate of income – so 45% for those enjoying large windfalls in a particular year – perhaps after a modest allowance of £20,000 or so, as a sop to the atavistic realities.
No it’s not a perfect solution but what is?
Have a great weekend.