Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

firstseason1987

Members
  • Posts

    49
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

37 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I am thinking ibonds too. Can get 3% or so if you buy by the end of this month, right? Ibonds are treasury bonds with an added adjustment for inflation.
  2. If I remember right when I heard it explained, if you went with a typical 3-fund portfolio, for example (1 domestic equity mutual fund, 1 international equity mutual fund, and 1 bond fund), and did all the work and allocations, you'd track a basic Target-Date fund pretty closely and it wouldn't really matter which one you owned when you're under $250k. But above that limit, asset location, putting the highest-returning funds into the best tax-advantaged account, will have a measurable impact on returns. If someone's retirement fund options were a 401k and a Roth, and they evenly split $200K into the 401k and $200k into the Roth and completely invest both fully into a 2050 Target Date fund, for example, they would under-perform an allocation that split up the same amounts into optimizing bonds into the 401k and the higher-returning equities as much as possible in the Roth. I think the $250k demarcation is the flex point at which it actually starts to matter, albeit only slightly. Once you're well above that number, then the impact is greater. Like, at $250k, re-allocating might return only ~1% more over 30 years(?), let's say, but at $500k it could mean 2-3%? At a million, 4-5% better return once you start making withdrawals? OTOH, if you only have one type of account, either a roth or a 401k, then it doesn't really matter because you can't tax-optimize.
  3. Do you have other retirement investment vehicles (like a 401k) or is the Roth your only retirement account? Generally, if you only have a Roth, and your total investment in the market is less than ~$250k, you're probably OK leaving it in a target date fund for now until it grows beyond 250k. You might now or eventually want to change the target-date fund to one 5 or 10 years past when you think you are going to retire, because these funds are super conservative on asset allocation and might be over-invested in safe bond-type funds on a faster path than you might want. But for now, 20 years out, it's probably only 95/5% stocks/bonds and doesn't make a difference. If you have other retirement accounts available to you, like a 401k and a Roth, once you hit $250k total across all accounts, you might want to consider selling out of the target date funds completely and then re-allocating inside the different accounts based on tax advantages. Figure out your allocation for bonds and value- and blue-chip index funds and buy those in the 401k, then use your Roth to maximize the portion used for REITs, dividend stocks, long shots, and growth funds. That way you're getting the maximum tax-free growth in the most advantaged account. Save the bonds portion for the tax-deferred 401k.
  4. Mine was Barbara Bush. Right age, too, if not also dead.
  5. Indians, Mariners, and Rangers, twice each in six weeks!
  6. Didn't even think to check. My PM sits unread as well. Guess it's SEUT guys only.
  7. While it's fair, it's got nothing to do with the original request that people PM him that I can figure out. Unless there's some kind of "trusted insider people only" thing going on which I obviously cannot guess the backstory behind.
  8. As I said before, I want some kind of explanation about what kind of shady deal you have going on that can only be explained in PM and not on the board before I turn over any more information to you. I don't even need it from you, any of the other people you've deemed worthy of sharing your info with can let me in on it too if they want. But I'm not giving up any more private personal info to anyone until I have a better idea why.
  9. I understand this line of thinking for, like, a stock... "If I liked Amazon enough to buy it at 3300, I should be happy to buy more at 3000", sure. I get that. You've done an analysis of the company and arrived at some value per share you think it's worth when you total up its assets, growth opportunities, liabilities, etc., and if nothing has changed, then a 10% discount is a great deal. If you think it's worth more than the market cap says, buy. But there's nothing underneath the crypto, no underlying asset, it's a currency exchange. And even then, yeah, I get when it's like "the exchange rate from dollars to pesos is great when I cross the border and can buy something cheaper over there"... like if Mexican Target always has your razors listed for 100 pesos, you can really score when the dollars to pesos rate moves in the right direction. But with crypto everything is priced in dollars and then you convert to coin at the end. No one lists a price as "this thing costs 0.01 bitcoins!" and then you can wait to see how fluctuations hit because the list price doesn't change. Instead the price is always in dollars and then you wait and see what exchange rate you get on the back end of the deal. So I'm not sure if the same process holds when a coin price moves vs when a stock price moves.
  10. Blame mods with itchy trigger fingers. Been here more than 10 years. I didn't realize you were going to be so picky about who you deign to respond to.
  11. What was this all about anyway? Never got a return PM. Made it just feel scammy.
  12. 1 paper with irreproducible results is hardly confidence inspiring
  13. There's no proof the drug works. There's proof it doesn't make things worse. It could very well be a placebo for all the (poorly-designed) studies have managed to prove. Maybe that is the point... a well-designed study would show it's not effective enough to be relevant. A poorly-designed study kicks the can down the road a few more months to stave off bankruptcy.
  14. Man it's bad when the FDA has to issue a statement confirming you're snake oil.
×
  • Create New...