That view might seem apocalyptic, but it is an idea worth contemplating. After all, the stock market has barely advanced since 2000, and the prognosis seems grim, as we near the close of the fourth year of a financial crisis that began in 2007 and shows no signs of ending.

WHAT BEGAN AS A CREDIT CRISIS is morphing into a sovereign-debt crisis characterized by chronically high unemployment rates and low interest rates. At the same time, huge swaths of Americans are preparing to leave, or have already left, the workforce. These retirees need their stock investments to sustain them in retirement—but most probably will find their investments are ill-suited to the task. They will be forced to find new jobs to sustain themselves, or they will have to change their ideas about retirement.

It’s naturally difficult to predict what will happen tomorrow, much less over the next decade, but Washington’s inability to come up with anything that resembles a recovery program—aside from lowering interest rates—seems ominous. Factor the European Union’s woes into the grim equation, and the economic and financial prognosis seems dire. Wall Street’s banks and institutions are certainly part of the problem, and should be part of the solution, but that, dear reader, is a story for another day.

Rather than debating politics, or fretting about the harsh realities at the start of the 21st century, it’s better to be self-reliant.

One solution that deserves serious study is offsetting the expected lack of stock-investment returns with a classic options-trading strategy that, studies have shown, outperforms buy-and-hold investing. The covered-call strategy entails selling calls, usually out-of-the-money, against stock already owned. The strategy also works in conjunction with buying stocks.

By selling calls and simultaneously buying stock, or selling calls against stock already owned, investors are, in effect, paid by the options market to buy or own stock. In return, investors must sell the stock to the options market if the stock’s price rises above the call’s strike price.

Consider IBM, which was trading around 190 late last week. Imagine you own the stock (ticker: IBM) and you want to sell a call that expires in three to six months and is about 10% out-of-the-money. IBM’s April $205 call is a good fit. By selling the option, investors collect $4.20. If IBM’s stock price does nothing, investors make a 2.7% return. If the stock advances beyond the call’s $205 strike price, investors make 12% in about five months. If the stock declines, the money received for selling the call will offset declines down to $182.98. (All returns include IBM’s dividend, which you get because you own the stock.)

IF THE STOCK ISN’T CALLED AWAY, because the stock didn’t rise past the $205 strike price, think of the money received as a “conditional dividend.” IBM pays a $3 annual dividend. The call sale generated $4.20. The dividend is conditional because you are obligated to turn over the stock if its price exceeds the call’s $205 strike price.

The drawback to selling calls against stocks is that it requires constant attention to the market. Many people, if news reports are to be believed, ignore the market when it is sinking, and pay attention only to rallies. Because a call option, like any option, is alive and kicking until expiration, investors must monitor the position. If that’s something you can handle, try using the call-selling strategy to enhance stock returns without significantly increasing risk.

It just might help you prosper during the Terrible Twenty.