Experts Matter. Find Yours.

The Retiree's Guide to Market Volatility: Building Your Financial Safety Net with a Cash Wedge Strategy

Let's get one thing straight: the stock market doesn't care that you're retired. It doesn't care that you finally cleaned out that drawer full of ancient T4 slips, promised yourself you'd stop checking your RRIF balance daily, or told your spouse, "This year, we're sticking to the plan." The Market Doesn't Care About Your Retirement Date Markets wobble because they wobble. Headlines panic. Analysts disagree sharply — and confidently. And somewhere, a retiree stands in front of the fridge, wondering whether to sell everything or simply turn off the news. But retirement isn't a day-trading contest; it's a decades-long longevity project. The aim is to generate reliable income, maintain sleep-at-night discipline, and avoid the common mistake among retirees of saving too much while living too little. Your Retirement Income Defense: Sectors That Weather Any Storm Read the news, and you'll see a constant blizzard of rising prices created by our neighbours to the south. Not just little price increases, but if economists are right about what we can expect, it's best to “inflation-proof” yourself - before you need it.  But keep in mind, every downturn follows the same pattern: a few key sectors keep humming while everything else goes through a mild identity crisis. The Classic Defensive Trio for Canadian Retirees: Consumer Staples (groceries, household essentials) Utilities (keeping the lights on and heat up) Healthcare (aging doesn't pause for recessions) Research on past downturns shows these sectors experienced significantly smaller losses than the S&P 500 during selloffs. When markets tantrum, these industries act like the sensible cousin who says, "We'll get through this. Have a muffin." Canadian-Specific Additions: Telecoms (we'll cut many things, but not Wi-Fi) Pipelines (fee-for-service revenue, though rate-sensitive) Combine these with low-volatility or dividend ETFs, and your portfolio suddenly feels less like a roller coaster and more like a slow-moving Via Rail train: reasonably steady, unfussy, and you still get to where you're going. The Cash Wedge: And Why You Need One Think of your retirement plan as a three-layer cake: Long-term investments (stocks, dividend ETFs, balanced portfolios) Intermediate safety assets (short GICs, T-bills, high-interest savings) Cash you can actually live on (your wedge) Your Cash Wedge sits at the very front of the line — a 12–24-month cushion of living expenses held in stable, boring, absolutely-not-newsworthy places: High-interest savings accounts Short-term GICs Treasury bills Cashable deposits It's essentially the "dry powder" you need to ride through market volatility without panic-selling. Three Critical Risks Your Cash Wedge Protects Against 1. Sequence-of-Returns Risk in Early Retirement This is the risk that markets drop early in your retirement while you're withdrawing. It's the silent killer of portfolios. A cash wedge buys you: Time for dividends to arrive Time for markets to recover Time for calm to return 2. Emotional Decision-Making During Market Downturns When markets fall, too many retirees experience "sell-and-suffer syndrome": They sell low Lock in losses Delay recovery Reduce the lifespan of their savings 3. Portfolio Depletion at Critical Moments Without a cash wedge, every withdrawal during a downturn digs a deeper hole. With a cash wedge, withdrawals can pause while investments rebound. "Think of a cash wedge as retirement jiu-jitsu — using stability to neutralize volatility." How to Calculate Your Ideal Cash Wedge Size There's no magic number, but here's a practical framework: 12 months of essential expenses for retirees with pensions or steady income sources 18 months for those relying heavily on investments 24 months for anyone highly risk-averse or aging in place on a fixed budget This isn't a pile of cash sitting in a chequing account — it's a structured, laddered buffer. Why Canadian Retirees Often Resist Building a Cash Wedge I've heard all of these comments over the years from many retirees: "Cash earns nothing." Not true anymore — HISAs and T-bills offer competitive yields. "I don't want my money sitting around doing nothing." It isn't doing nothing — it's protecting your future income. "I've always been fully invested." Retirement changes the rules. What worked during the accumulation phases of retirement can be dangerous during deaccumulation. The Cash Wedge is not an investment strategy. It is an income preservation strategy — the most important one in retirement. Real-Life Example: The 2020 Market Crash Test Remember 2020?  Stock markets dropped nearly 35% in just weeks. Let's consider two couples with similar assets: Couple A : had a 2-year cash wedge Couple B : had none Couple A simply shifted withdrawals from their wedge, not their portfolio. Couple B sold their best assets at their worst prices — causing permanent damage. This is why I tell retirees: "The Cash Wedge protects your portfolio from you." It’s 12–24 months of living expenses kept in cash, high-interest savings accounts (HISA), short-term GICs, or T-Bills. It's not exciting. No one flaunts a 6-month GIC at brunch. But the emergency fund prevents disaster: selling investments at the worst possible time. It buys you time. It buys you calm. It buys you the uninterrupted ability to buy groceries. The Cash Wedge alone is powerful. But for Canadian homeowners — especially those whose wealth sits mostly in their property — there’s a second buffer that can dramatically strengthen your financial resilience: your home equity.  We'll explore that in Part 2 of this post tomorrow.  Sue Don’t Retire… ReWire!!! Want to become an expert on serving the senior demographic? Just message me to be notified about the next opportunity to become a "Certified Equity Advocate" — mastering solution-based advising that transforms how you work with Canada's fastest-growing client segment.

Worked Through Thanksgiving? That’s a Burnout Red Flag, Not a Badge of Honor

If your Thanksgiving weekend included answering work emails from a guest room, sneaking Slack replies between courses, or “just finishing one thing” while your family watched a movie, you’re not alone. But Craig Selinger, an executive function coach who works with high achievers, says it’s a warning sign, not proof of commitment. “More and more of my clients tell me they ‘took time off’ - but then admit they were checking in on everything from their phones,” Selinger says. “They come back to work exhausted, frustrated with their families, and confused about why they don’t feel refreshed.” He doesn’t see this as a time-management failure. He sees it as a boundary failure fueled by an always-on culture. “Old technology stayed in one place,” he explains. “A desktop in a home office was easy to walk away from. Now, work follows you onto the couch, into your in-laws’ living room, and onto the plane ride home. Unless you deliberately decide when you’re not available, the default is ‘always working, never actually off.’” After holidays like Thanksgiving, Selinger helps clients reflect on a few key questions: Did you actually have any fully work-free hours or days? Did your phone stay with you during meals and family time - and did you feel pulled to check it? Do you feel like you rested, or like you just changed locations while staying on call? “If the honest answers are uncomfortable, that’s valuable data,” he says. “It means your relationship with availability needs attention.” Instead of telling high performers to “just unplug,” Selinger works with them to redesign their availability ahead of the next holiday crunch: Setting clear out-of-office messages that specify when they’ll be offline and when they’ll check in. Agreeing with their team on what counts as a true emergency and which channel should be used for it. Creating short, non-negotiable deep-rest windows - for example, no work apps from 5-9 p.m. on certain days, or one weekend day that’s completely work-free. “When people see that they can set smart boundaries and still be respected and effective, that’s usually the turning point,” Selinger says. “They stop confusing constant responsiveness with real value.” With December’s year-end push approaching, he believes now is the time for high performers to recalibrate. “Treat this past Thanksgiving as a test run,” he suggests. “If you didn’t get the rest you needed, don’t just shrug it off. Use it as the moment you decide to draw a clearer line before the next holiday - for your performance and for the people who actually sat across the table from you.” About the Expert Craig Selinger is an executive function coach who works with founders, executives, families, and high-achieving students. He specializes in digital distraction, productivity, and helping people build realistic boundaries in an always-on work culture. Craig is part of the Executive Function Coaching Community at Offline.now

Georgia Southern faculty featured on prestigious top 2% of scientists list

Twelve outstanding active faculty members from Georgia Southern University were featured on Stanford and Elsevier’s 2025 list of the top 2% of scientists in the world. This annual list features scientists whose work has had the highest citation count and citation impact in their fields within a given year. This year’s Georgia Southern honorees represent a diverse range of disciplines, from physics and chemistry to epidemiology and business. Ten of the 12 faculty members were also featured on last year’s list. Vice President for Research and Economic Development David Weindorf, Ph.D, P.G., is among them and takes pride in seeing so many familiar names, and a couple of new ones, included. “Seeing names from so many different disciplines, both old and new, speaks volumes about our growth and consistency,” said Weindorf. “I’m so thankful for these faculty who relentlessly pursue excellence and truly embody growing ourselves to grow others in research.” Check out who made the list from Georgia Southern by clicking on the attached media release below: Looking to know more about Georgia Southern University and it's nationally recognized faculty — simply contact Georgia Southern's Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to arrange an interview today.

Intellectual Property Law Scholar Waseem Moorad, Esq., Unwraps Crux Arguments of Smucker’s Sandwich Suit

A popular on-the-go sandwich is now the subject of a mega trademark lawsuit between two food industry giants. The J.M. Smucker Company, more commonly known as Smucker’s, recently filed a trademark lawsuit against grocery chain Trader Joe’s over what it alleges is infringement upon its iconic billion-dollar investment: the Uncrustables sandwich. Smucker’s seeks to obtain unspecified monetary damages from Trader Joe’s, as well as profit from its similar product. But beyond the novelty of the sandwich suit lies a complex case built around a lesser-known morsel of trademark law, says Waseem Moorad, Esq., assistant professor of Law at Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law and director of the school’s Intellectual Property Clinic. Professor Moorad, a former U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent (USPTO) examiner, recently discussed the actual claims of the lawsuit, and how both parties are preparing for a potential trial. Q. Since this lawsuit was filed, it has been a popular topic of public discourse, much of which has centered on the product—a crustless peanut butter and jelly sandwich—itself. Is that what this is truly about? Professor Moorad: Much of the commentary has been focused on the argument of whether Smucker's is permitted to have a monopoly of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, or if Trader Joe's can actually infringe upon the Uncrustables product without necessarily using the actual trademarked name. While both discussions are legitimate conversations folks could have while munching on the delicious snack products, they are not necessarily the relevant legal claims at the crux of this lawsuit. Q: Before we get into what those relevant legal claims are, Smucker’s has filed dozens of trademarks in its 128-year history. What sorts of intellectual property do these trademarks generally protect? PM: Most of their trademarks filed with the USPTO are registered to protect against competitors from using words, logos, slogans, symbols and other materials that are linked to the brand name of the company, its affiliates, or its respective products. Well-known examples include Smucker's, Folgers, Jif, and, of course, Uncrustables. If a competing company has a brand or a product that has a similar sounding name or appearance, such as "Giff Peanut Butter," then Smucker's could sue that company for trademark infringement. That name is not only infringing upon a trademark that Smucker's has federal protection over, but also is in the same related industry (food products), within which Smucker's has protection. Q: But Trader Joe’s did not necessarily infringe on any trademarked words, symbols, slogans or the like. What, then, is the basis for the claims of infringement? PM: The issue is related to a deeper subset of trademark law, specifically the concept of "trade dress." Trade dress is the intellectual property associated with the visual and aesthetic characteristics of a product or its related packaging that allows a consumer to know with whom that product or packaging is associated. For example, Coca-Cola's name, which is federally protected, is well known as a registered trademark; however, the Coca-Cola bottle, with the curvy appearance where it gets slimmer in the middle, is an example of a registered trade dress belonging to Coca-Cola. If there was no logo or word mark on the bottle, the average consumer would still be able to recognize it as a Coke bottle. There are several trademarks that Smucker's owns that are related to the trade dress of its products. Smucker's isn’t alleging that Trader Joe's is copying any of the branding names of their products; they are accusing their competitor of mimicking the trade dress or aesthetic appearances, textures, and characteristics of its Uncrustables products and packaging. Q: What specific trade dress trademarks are they claiming have been infringed upon? PM: There are at least two registered trademarks that Smucker's is drawing legal attention to. In 2002, Smucker's had trademarked the image of an Uncrustables sandwich that has pie-crimping indentations or marks along the circumference of the sandwich, and in 2019, the company trademarked the image of an Uncrustables sandwich with a bite taken out of it. Smucker's argument is that the Trader Joe's packaging for a similar crustless peanut butter and jelly shows an image of a sandwich with a bite taken out of it, as well as the crimping along the outer edges. Q: How does one make a legal case out of something like this? PM: In order to effectively file a trademark infringement lawsuit, the plaintiff must not only show that their federally-protected intellectual property rights are being infringed upon, but also demonstrate that as a result of this infringement, the customer or consumer is being confused. Smucker's alleges that as result of Trader Joe's actions, customers are now confused over the product and are purchasing Trader Joe's peanut butter and jelly sandwiches thinking they are actually Smucker's Uncrustables sandwiches. Smucker's is of the belief that if the Trader Joe's packaging did not show pie-like crimped edges and the image of the sandwich with a bite taken out of it, confused consumers would not have purchased the Trader Joe's products and would have instead purchased Smucker's Uncrustables. It is this argument that will be the crux of the court cases to follow. Q: Assuming this goes to trial, how will the two parties prepare and what are some of the challenges for Smucker’s as plaintiff? PM: Part of the case on Smucker's end will be to gather customer feedback or testimony that demonstrates confusion in the marketplace as a result of the similar packaging and trade dress. Trader Joe's will focus on the fact that even though the packaging may be similar, there would be no reason or basis for a customer to be confused between a Trader Joe's-branded product and a Smucker's-branded product. As the plaintiff in this case, the burden shall be on Smucker's to prove the confusion element necessary to have trademark infringement. The Trader Joe’s product clearly says Trader Joe’s, and the chain has a marketplace reputation for selling its own products rather than other-branded products. The challenge in such a scenario will be to prove, despite this, that customers purchasing this product would still have gotten confused and either assumed that they were purchasing Uncrustables, or mistakenly believed that Uncrustables may now have a commercial relationship with Trader Joe's.

LSU Marketing Expert Dan Rice Available to Speak on Black Friday 2025

As Black Friday approaches, LSU has an expert available to break down what consumers can expect this year. Dan Rice, professor of marketing can speak on: • Emerging Black Friday consumer behavior and spending patterns • How inflation and economic uncertainty are shaping purchasing decisions • Shifts toward online vs. in-store shopping • Strategies retailers are using to drive demand If you’re working on Black Friday or holiday shopping coverage, Our team would be happy to connect you with Dan for an interview.

U.S. News: AI Can’t Replace Therapists – But It Can Help Them

For a young adult who is lonely or just needs someone to talk to, an artificial intelligence chatbot can feel like a nonjudgmental best friend, offering encouragement before an interview or consolation after a breakup. AI’s advice seems sincere, thoughtful and even empathic – in short, very human. But when a vulnerable person alludes to thoughts of suicide, AI is not the answer. Not by itself, at least. Recent stories have documented the heartbreak of people dying by suicide after seeking help from chatbots rather than fellow humans. In this way, the ethos of the digital world – sometimes characterized as “move fast and break things” – clashes with the health practitioners’ oath to “first, do no harm.” When humans are being harmed, things must change. As a researcher and licensed therapist with a background in computer science, I am interested in the intersection between technology and mental health, and I understand the technological foundations of AI. When I directed a counseling clinic, I sat with people in their most vulnerable moments. These experiences prompt me to consider the rise of therapy chatbots through both a technical and clinical lens. AI, no matter how advanced, lacks the morality, responsibility and duty of care that humans carry. When someone has suicidal thoughts, they need human professionals to help. With years of training before we are licensed, we have specific ethical protocols to follow when a person reveals thoughts of suicide. Read the full article here:

How Americans Want Colleges to Teach Thinking — And Why the Experts from Vanderbilt Say This Moment Matters

A new national Unity Poll from Vanderbilt University shows overwhelming agreement among Americans on one core belief: colleges should teach students how to think, not what to think. At a time when higher education is under intense political and cultural scrutiny, this finding reveals an unexpected area of unity. Amid debates over free speech, curriculum design, and the purpose of a degree, Americans are signaling a shared expectation for colleges to cultivate critical thinking and reasoning — not ideological conformity. For journalists, observers or anyone keeping a close eye on post-secondary education,  this is a rare lens into what the public actually wants from higher education, and a timely point of entry into stories about academic freedom, the value of a college degree, political polarization, and workforce readiness. “Many observers think current debates about the nature of higher education are relatively new but they are not,” said John Geer, co-director of the Vanderbilt Unity Poll and professor of political science. “The country, for example, was debating the purpose, value and direction of higher education in the 1940s when the federal government made major investments in research and teaching during and after World War II.” “People want colleges and professors to teach students how to think, not what to think,” added Vanderbilt Poll Co-Director Josh Clinton, who holds the Abby and Jon Winkelried Chair at Vanderbilt and is a professor of political science. “The public most highly values those parts of higher education that help students think critically, process information and contribute meaningfully to society. The closer you get to subjects and content that has associations with contemporary political divisions, the more you see public support fracture.” John Geer and Josh Clinton, Co-Directors of the Vanderbilt Unity Poll and Professors of Political Science, are among the nation’s leading experts on public opinion, political behavior and democratic attitudes. With decades of research experience and multiple national polls under their leadership, Geer and Clinton bring essential context to these findings. Their perspective helps media interpret not only the data itself, but the broader social forces shaping how Americans view higher education, institutional trust and the role of colleges in preparing the next generation. What the Data Reveals: 1. A Return to Fundamentals: The Public Wants Critical Thinking Above All Ninety percent of Americans say “the ability to think more logically” is extremely or very important for their children to gain from college. Factual knowledge matters too, but the public places higher value on reasoning, analysis and cognitive skill-building. Geer can help illuminate why this shift is resonating so strongly now — and what it suggests about the changing expectations placed on colleges and universities. 2. A Rare Point of Consensus in a Polarized Era The emphasis on teaching students how to think cuts across political, geographic and demographic lines. Geer notes that agreement of this magnitude is increasingly uncommon in today’s contentious climate. This story angle gives journalists a data-driven counterpoint to the typical “campus culture wars” narrative — showing where unity still exists and why. 3. Is College Worth It? Depends How You Ask When asked about long-term value, a majority of Americans say a college degree is worth the time because it opens better job prospects. But when the question focuses on financial cost, support drops significantly. Geer and Clinton can walk reporters through why perceptions differ depending on how “value” is framed — and how these attitudes influence choices about pursuing postsecondary education. 4. Americans Oppose Government Control of College Teaching Most respondents say the federal government should not direct how professors teach. This adds nuance to ongoing debates about curriculum oversight, classroom autonomy and political influence in higher education. Geer and Clinton’s expertise help explain how this preference aligns with longstanding public attitudes about institutional independence. 5. Curriculum Flashpoints Reveal Sharp Divides While many Americans agree on the need for core historical and civic content, support fragments around politically charged topics. Issues such as gender identity, sexual orientation, and certain cultural topics show much lower consensus. Read the full article and report here:

Canada's First Lifetime Fixed-Rate Reverse Mortgage: A Game-Changer or Just Another Option?

Every so often, a retirement product emerges that makes even a seasoned boomer take notice and remark, "Well, isn't that interesting?" The Globe and Mail reported that Bloom Finance has introduced Canada's first "lifetime fixed-rate reverse mortgage." What’s a Lifetime Fixed-Rate Reverse Mortgage? A Fixed Rate Reverse Mortgage is a financing option that gives you a permanently locked-in interest rate for as long as you hold the loan—not just for a typical five-year term. This could appeal to many Canadians entering retirement: It means you can unlock tax-free equity from your home without worrying that future rate hikes will eat into your cash flow or erode your long-term plans. What makes this even more appealing is the nature of a reverse mortgage itself. You’re not required to make monthly payments You retain full ownership of your home Your rate simply determines how your balance grows over time. When that rate is fixed for life, it removes one of the biggest sources of uncertainty, allowing retirees to plan confidently, protect more of their equity, and use their home as a stable financial tool rather than a source of stress. In short, a fixed-rate reverse mortgage combines the predictability retirees crave with the flexibility they need—something increasingly hard to find in today’s jittery rate environment. Bloom's New Lifetime Reverse Mortgage: Why People Are Talking Reverse mortgages allow homeowners aged 55+ to access up to roughly 55% of their home's equity without taxes, without monthly payments, and without affecting OAS or GIS. In the past, concerns have centred on the compounded interest and the uncertainty of future rates. Bloom's new Lifetime Reverse Mortgage offering aims to ease this stress by offering a fixed rate for life. Currently, that rate is 6.69%.  The rates are a bit higher than other reverse mortgage products on the market.  For comparison here are some current rates at the time of publication: Home Trust's (6.44% for a 5-year fixed rate) Equitable Bank (6.54%) HomeEquity Bank's (6.64%) 5-year fixed rates. Looking Beyond the Rates of Reverse Mortgages Bloom's real appeal with this new product is emotional: no more renewal surprises. For retirees on fixed incomes, the stability of a fixed rate feels different. It's like a weighted blanket for your financial nervous system. Think of it as an insurance policy against rising interest rates. And boomers love insurance. We insure our hips, luggage, vacations, eyeglasses, cell phones, and emotions (usually at the spa). So, a mortgage rate that stays stable? Yes, please. But let’s look beyond the mechanics of this product. We need to discuss a force even greater than compound interest: luck. Let's Talk About Luck (aka: The Retirement Wild Card) Here's a truth many boomers seldom admit: financial success isn't only about planning. It's about timing. It's about circumstance. And yes… pure, unfiltered luck. As humans — especially we entitled boomers — we tend to overemphasize our achievements and downplay our faults. And let's be honest: we don't like admitting when we're wrong. Society often rewards the strong and wrong more than the weak and right. (If you're unsure, just watch any political panel for 30 seconds.) Even Warren Buffett — the patron saint of rational investing — made a spectacularly poor decision when he bought Dexter Shoe for $433 million in Berkshire stock. The company later became worthless. Buffett described it as the worst deal of his life. If the Oracle of Omaha can make a mistake, the rest of us can certainly recognize how luck has influenced our real estate stories. And oh, did luck influence the boomer journey. We bought homes when they were affordable; when interest rates were character-building, and avocado appliances were peak chic. Then real estate skyrocketed. Homes doubled, tripled, quadrupled. Not because we were geniuses — but because we were standing in the right place at the right time. Let's be even more honest: A boomer's worst day in real estate is a millennial's dream day. We might not like admitting it, but it's true. And yes — boomers get to show off a little because we also carried the burden of our failures: recessions, layoffs, 19% mortgage rates, renovation disasters, and property taxes that still make us weep into our soup. But luck? She was definitely in the room. Now that we've named her, we can begin speaking honestly about how to use the equity we possess — wisely, deliberately, and with eyes wide open. Let's Discuss the Numbers (Because We Ought To) Here's where the real impact happens. Say you're 70 and you take out a $200,000 reverse mortgage at Bloom's lifetime rate of 6.69%. Over 20 years, with compounding interest and no payments, you'd owe approximately $724,000. Now, if you took out a traditional reverse mortgage at 6.54% over those same 20 years (not including rate hikes, though they're likely), you'd owe approximately $707,000. That's a $17,000 difference — not a high price to pay for lifelong comfort. But There Are Trade-Offs The early-exit penalties are steep: · 8% in year one · Decreasing until year five · Then three months' interest thereafter Penalties are waived if you downsize, move to assisted living, or pass away. But if you leave for other reasons? You're responsible for the costs. Translation: Only select this reverse mortgage product if you genuinely plan to stay put. Zooming Out: The Full Menu of Equity Options This lifetime reverse mortgage is just one tool in a broad (and expanding) equity-release toolkit. Others include: ADUs (Accessory Dwelling Units): Build a suite, rent it out, house a caregiver, or create multigenerational living. Offers independence and income potential. Downsizing: The classic move. Big house to small house to building a solid cash cushion. Emotionally complex, financially empowering. HELOCs (Home Equity Lines of Credit): Offer flexible, interest-only repayment options. Manulife One: The Swiss Army knife of HELOCs. Perfect for disciplined retirees. HESA (Home Equity Sharing Agreements): No payments or interest — you exchange future house appreciation for cash today. Traditional Reverse Mortgages: Similar to Bloom in structure but without the lifetime rate. And yes — boomers have more equity-access options than any generation in Canadian history. Not arrogance. Just facts. And increasingly relevant ones. Research shows that 91% of older adults in Canada prefer to age at home rather than move to an institution, with 92.1% of Canadian seniors currently living in private dwellings in the community. Honest Questions to Ask Yourself Before Signing for Any Type of Loan Wondering if you should take the leap?  Before you even consider signing anything, pour yourself something warm (or stronger) and ask a few honest questions. · Am I emotionally ready, or just tired of worrying about money? · Am I genuinely content to remain in this home forever, or am I romanticizing the past? · Where are interest rates heading — and how will that affect my comfort level? · What exactly do I need cash flow for — income, essentials, opportunities, legacy, or "finally something for ME"? · Have I thought about how this decision might affect my children and inheritance? · What future choices could this create — or prevent? · And the biggest question of all: if Plan A fails, is Plan B truly realistic… or just wearing yoga pants and pretending? Because here's the real truth: the happiest retirees aren't the ones who got lucky — they're the ones who used their luck with purpose, timing, and emotional clarity. Bloom's lifetime reverse mortgage isn't a miracle cure, nor is it a trap. It's simply one tool — and for the right person, it provides emotional stability and financial predictability. Here's What Matters Before you sign for a reverse mortgage, HELOCs, or anything else with an acronym and a sales commission attached, here's my professional advice: Get the full picture so you can make decisions that truly work for your life — not merely to meet someone else's sales quota.  The "best" financial move isn't the one that appears impressive on a spreadsheet. It's the one that allows you to sleep peacefully at night. The one that grounds you emotionally and supports you financially. Retirement isn't the end of the story. It's the chapter where you finally get to blend strategy with self-awareness, confidence with clarity, and luck with a bit of laughter. And if life insists on being unpredictable? Then outsmart it, outlaugh it, and choose the equity tools that help your future self say, "Nice move." Love, Aunt Equity" aka Sue "Don't Retire… ReWire!!!" Want to become an expert on serving the senior demographic? Just message me to be notified about the next opportunity to become a "Certified Equity Advocate" — mastering solution-based advising that transforms how you work with Canada's fastest-growing client segment.