Fiduciary Rule: “Fiduciaries is the legal term for a broad group of professionals who are required to put customers’ interests first. They cannot accept compensation or payments that would create a conflict of interest.” (Lee, Kathryn) That quote came directly from the article on U.S. Pirg, written by Ms. Lee about the interview (I am assuming) with John Oliver about retirement and what comes with retirement.
Lets just start with, I know nothing about retirement funds, how to get one, who to talk to, where to start, how to start, what else to do to increase your retirement, nothing. What I do know is, most jobs offer a 401k, it is important to start at a young age, and investing in your future is probably the best thing you can do in your youth.
Okay, so the fiduciary rule now defined by me: Those that are in the financial advisor positions are not out for their best interest, but are out for the best interest of their client. Meaning, they must do what they can to ensure that their client is receiving the best advice and pointed in the best decision making direction specific to their customer (the person receiving the financial help). This is what it means to me, and I gathered that meaning from the article on U.S Pirg, by Kathryn Lee. I felt, compared to the other article about the 4 arguments by Patrick Tucker, Lee did a much better job at defining and applying that definition of the fiduciary rule to the point that an ignorant consumer, like me, was able to come up with their own definition. She did this my specifically defining the word, then going on to explain again what Mr. Oliver was speaking on in his interview. She elaborated on what it means to have high fees and low fees when choosing a retirement plan, what it meant for those who did not have to go by the fiduciary rule, and an actively managed fund. Each of these topics she spoke on were quick, but to the point and it had enough basic information to clearly understand what she was talking about. On the other hand, the article written by Tucker, I had no idea what he was even saying. He was speaking about things I knew nothing about, and didn’t offer very much background knowledge for me to “catch up” to his article. This made is difficult for me to quite understand the fiduciary rule and what these myths meant that he was talking about. This doesn’t mean he had written a bad article, because I am sure to those that knew what he was talking about appreciated the shortness and to the point the article was. Just for me, between the two articles, Ms. Lee did an excellent job on explaining and providing clear understanding for the fiduciary rule, what it meant, and where it applied.