Bogleheads.org

I have a friend that does it monthly. Has the thing fully automated and takes only about 5 minutes for him. His rationale: - Most of his bills are of a monthly nature - This maps more closely to how he got paid when he was still working This keeps in a similar mindset for earning/spending as he was in during his working years. I will probably follow this model for the same reasons. Plus I find this psychologically easier, for some reason, to keep to a budget. I'll still have money in a high yield savings account for big or unexpected expenditures. But the monthly "paycheck" will remind me that I'm on a budget. The large savings I have will also allow me to pause distributions in a down market for a year or three--at least until R...

I was just researching this topic and came across this:

https://jsevy.com/wordpress/index.php/finance-and-retirement/annual-or-monthly-withdrawal/

The author says that monthly usually has better outcomes, but he notes that an "adaptive" withdrawal scheme works best in markets "in which there’s actually a negative annualized inflation-adjusted return over the first decade" (this may be the market we're currently in, but who can know?):

"The two example scenarios show that the difference in balance grows over the course of the retirement period, with the monthly withdrawal scheme being ahead almost always, and quite significantly under good market conditions."

Tired of gimmicks? The airline industry is now "Gimmicks R Us."

Pricing is all gimmicks, with frustration and insult thrown in for good measure.

I now hate the airlines. Perhaps that's what they wanted?

windaar wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2023 7:38 pm Time to leave this job and find a new one. Lots of them out there. You're too young to retire, especially with 2 kids to raise.

+1

Yeah, this is really sad, although I'm sure the remaining photo sites/forums are seeing a decent influx of new blood as a result.

Clearly the smartphone has dealt a death blow to consumer interest in dedicated cameras, on the whole. The camera market has plummeted since 2010, and no doubt dpreview's numbers reflect that.

I used to run a large photography forum, and I saw from the back end numbers the demise of the dedicated camera. 2010 was definitely the high point.

Fremdon Ferndock wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2023 3:39 pm Financial success is one thing, but happiness is another.

Finance is so much easier.

muel87 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 20, 2023 1:54 pm why would anyone buy mutual fund shares at Vanguard when the ETF is cheaper (even if only a little)?

I've tried many times to hold ETFs but have failed miserably each time. It's too tempting to watch the ETF price go up and down during the day, and ETFs are too easy to sell. Consequently, I hold no more ETFs. Mutual funds protect me from myself, and that alone is worth whatever extra basis point it costs.

I have to imagine the temptation to trade ETFs is a feature, not a bug, and brokerages love them as a result.

Everybody gets to do what they want to do and hear what they want to hear when it comes to emergency funds. I'm not sure I really understand the concern over the definition of this. One thing I am sure of, though, is that you'll understand the need for an emergency fund when you have an unexpected need for more cash than you budgeted for. Sometimes you have to live a long time for this to happen. I assume most of us are going to make bad money decisions at some point by the time we leave this earth. There are probably worse things that could happen than being 100% stocks all the time and needing to sell some of those in a down market because you need fast cash. In other words, in the grand scheme of things, none of this matters a whole lot.

Do you monitor the iPhone forum on mac rumors? I've seen a number of threads there about disappointing camera on 14 pro. Here's one:

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ip ... a.2372919/

Lately I've been feeling like I want to indulge myself and upgrade from my perfectly adequate iPhone SE to one of the 14-series models. Quite un-Bogleheadish of me! This is a want, not a need. Don't do it. Waste of time and money. The thrill of a shiny new toy will wear off quickly. The iPhone 15 is only 6 months away. The max version will be lighter than the 14 pro max (important) and more comfortable to hold, with rounded edges rather than the square stainless steel. And the 16 is only 12 months away from then. Friend of mine has the 14 pro max. My pictures from the 8 Plus look as good to both of us. Maybe we're looking at them wrong? The quality of the photographer goes a long way, I'd say. A good book on the art and science of photogra...

catdude wrote: ↑Mon Mar 20, 2023 12:55 am Lately I've been feeling like I want to indulge myself and upgrade from my perfectly adequate iPhone SE to one of the 14-series models. Quite un-Bogleheadish of me! This is a want, not a need.

Don't do it. Waste of time and money. The thrill of a shiny new toy will wear off quickly.

The iPhone 15 is only 6 months away. The max version will be lighter than the 14 pro max (important) and more comfortable to hold, with rounded edges rather than the square stainless steel.

Apple has heard the complaints about the ridiculous weight of the stainless steel phones and the fact that they cut into your hands as you're holding them.

dvvader wrote: ↑Mon Mar 20, 2023 10:22 am an emergency fund must meet at least two criteria:

1. It must be liquid and accessible
2. It must be principal-protected

To me, this strongly suggests an emergency fund consists of assets like cash in a savings account, iBonds held >1 year, short-term Tbills, etc.

Correct. If you have to "sell low" or at a loss to raise emergency cash, it's not an emergency fund. It's a mistake.

You can twist yourself into a pretzel trying to justify a stock portfolio as constituting an emergency fund. All I can say to that is, "good luck." You'll need it.

This year I've been hit with ~$50K+ of emergency expenses. Without my emergency fund, I would have had to sell stock holdings at a loss. Not good.

placeholder wrote: ↑Sun Mar 19, 2023 5:45 pm My withdrawal rate is "as needed" which so far has been zero due to my pension so I've had about 30% increase since retirement.

I looked at this approach, too, and could do it, for a while at least, but then I realized that RMDs would kick in, early 70s, that would likely result in a larger tax bill than if I had started withdrawals earlier in order to keep the size and therefore the RMDs to a reasonable levels.

Are you forgetting about RMDs or not concerned about the tax hit if you simply let the portfolio grow until you're required to take money?

If growing is your goal then SWR is not a good method to use. It increases spending according to CPI, doesn't cut back during a downturn; both are bad ideas if you are trying to grow your portfolio. Rather than surveying SWR, I'd suggest finding a withdrawal method that is more likely to grow your portfolio such as a low FWR method. Thanks. I've gathered that. Wanted to collect some experiences w/ individual withdrawal rates. It's sounding like a withdrawal rate of 2.5 to 3.5 percent will be reasonable under most market circumstances. I have actually positioned myself with enough cash reserves to make my withdrawal rate variable, depending upon actual returns in a given year, at least until RMDs kick in. Absent market conditions that requi...

tibbitts wrote: ↑Sun Mar 19, 2023 11:16 am In fairness "prudence" in terms of 2 or 3 years in cash in an "income producing account" has only been heard of frequently around here recently, really during the last year or so. An emergency fund as always been popular, but more in the sub-year range, even for retirees. And of course in the CFG we had all kinds of discussions about low-percentages of equities, but it was almost always bonds that were on the other side of that. If we see a few more consecutive years like 2022 your post would probably read 5 or 6 years of cash-like investments, and I'm not being critical at all, I'm just saying that we all blow around a lot in the wind despite the whole "stay the course" thing.

Excellent points.

dcabler wrote: ↑Sat Mar 18, 2023 8:42 am Regarding RMD's somebody has probably already said it but just because you are forced to withdraw, doesn't mean you have to spend it (after taxes, of course).

Cheers.

Good point. I keep forgetting this.

If you're retired, which safe withdrawal rate (SWR) has allowed you actually to grow your nest egg, inflation-adjusted? And how about the future? Do you have any plans to change your SWR? Asset allocation? I'd like to compare your experience with my plans for an SWR. Of course, in my planning, the withdrawal rate has to be adjusted upwards when required minimum distributions kick in, and that makes portfolio growth particularly difficult, as it is supposed to, I suppose. Thanks. Experience for retirees starting in 1871 to today is tabulated here: https://engaging-data.com/visualizing-4-rule/ You can enter a starting portfolio value, asset allocation, amount of annual spending and number of years you want to look forward. The output will be...

If you're retired, which safe withdrawal rate (SWR) has allowed you actually to grow your nest egg, inflation-adjusted?

And how about the future? Do you have any plans to change your SWR?

Asset allocation?

I'd like to compare your experience with my plans for an SWR. Of course, in my planning, the withdrawal rate has to be adjusted upwards when required minimum distributions kick in, and that makes portfolio growth particularly difficult, as it is supposed to, I suppose.

Thanks.

02nz wrote: ↑Thu Mar 16, 2023 1:27 pm

cbox wrote: ↑Thu Mar 16, 2023 10:47 am I noticed that Capital One no longer offers the 11-month 5% CD. So perhaps you're right: act now if you want to lock in a rate that you think is attractive.

That's not an indication that rates are falling. Banks offer CDs based on their funding needs, and also Capital One (being sneaky) offers one-off CDs that will renew into much less competitive rates.

Good points.

An ETF is only permitted to pass through foreign tax credits (FTCs) to its shareholders if more than 50% of the value of the ETF's assets is invested in non-U.S. corporations on December 31. IRC Sec. 853(a)(1). VT's "Statement of Additional Information" states "if, at the close of its fiscal year, more than 50% of a fund’s total assets are invested in securities of foreign issuers, the fund may elect to pass through to shareholders the ability to deduct or, if they meet certain holding period requirements, take a credit for foreign taxes paid by the fund." Page B-20 of VT's SAI. As of November 30, 2017, only 48% of VT's assets were invested in non-U.S. corporations. If this percentage held through December 31, 2017, VT'...

I noticed that Capital One no longer offers the 11-month 5% CD. So perhaps you're right: act now if you want to lock in a rate that you think is attractive.

Great information (and confirmation), everyone. Hopefully now when people search this topic on the internet, they'll come across both the investopedia page and this thread.

Probably this kind of situation does not arise often (if ever) in a person's life, but if or when it does, it sounds like the person will have a great opportunity to sock away more in retirement funds than otherwise would be the case.

Do Roth IRA Contributions Count Toward Your 401(k) Limit? Investopedia is clear enough on this question--or seems to be: "No, Roth IRA contributions do not count toward your 401(k) limit. However, Roth IRA contributions do count toward your total IRA limit. So, if you contribute to both a Roth and a traditional IRA, then the combined amounts can’t exceed the annual contribution limit." Just checking, though: A friend of mine has worked thus far this year on a 1099 basis and contributed the max $6,500 to her self-directed Roth IRA. In April, though, she will begin working for the federal government, where she would like to max out her TSP with the limit of $22,500. My reading of Investopedia suggests that this is fine. Do you agree...

Russian roulette (Russian: Русская рулетка, romanized: Russkaya ruletka) is a potentially lethal game of chance in which a player places a single round in a revolver, spins the cylinder, places the muzzle against the head or body (of the opponent or themselves), and pulls the trigger.

Why did the idea of putting money into a single company's stock remind me of this

The TSP G Fund currently yields 4.125% for March and the F Fund SEC yield is 4.16%. Since it’s almost identical, would it be better to be in G instead of F for the gov 401k? Or is F better over the long term? I’m looking to rebalance with new contributions. Should not be an either-or question. Diversification is key, not guessing which one is better. Why not hold an appropriate lifecycle fund? In the TSP, you have professionally allocated funds that you can pick from based upon your age or intended retirement date. Use them rather than trying to be smarter than the professionals. If you're near or in retirement, use L Income. Then you'll have G, F, and a bit of equity. Plus you won't waste your time asking strangers on an internet message ...

If we learned anything from 2008, it has to be "counterparty risk."

We just don't know what we don't know about how exposed and interconnected financial institutions are.

tunafish wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 11:01 am I've never seen more people wasting their time worrying about nothing.

Agree--or think I agree.

However, many people who lived through the GFC of 2008-09 remember very well how one crack in a system leads to another, until the whole system is on the verge of collapse. And then everyone looks around, blinking, and says, "Wow, what happened?"

So there's some justification for being nervous. Might be called post-traumatic stress disorder, or it might be called déjà vu all over again.

We'll know on the other side.

In any case, the "What, me worry?" crowd will probably fare the best, since there's little anyone can do about it now.

The answer is maybe.

The other answer is that you're wasting your time by asking about mattresses online. You must go try them out.

Everybody wants to buy everything online these days. You can't do that with everything--or if you do, you'll waste a whole lot of your time on reading reviews and chatting to people online who do not live in your body and your brain.

Mattress comfort is personal. You gotta get up, go to the store, and make a call. You'll spend far less time that way, and the money you do spend--whether it's $300 or $3,000--will have been spent on something you've tried.

My understanding is that Social Security coordinates with the pension systems of many countries, so they will know, whether your colleague "gets" it (takes it) or not.

But I suggest you give Social Security a call. They're actually quite helpful. And please report back what you learn rather than just disappearing once you find out.

Thanks.

I've seen a lot of articles lately telling investors to move into fixed income instead of being in the market. In my mind, isn't it now the time to continue investing or DCA because everyone is worried about the falling market? Am I looking at this the wrong way? When the market's down, I prefer to be more exposed to the market AND accumulate cheaper shares. I don't think one should be "moving" into anything under any market circumstances. You should have an age-appropriate allocation at all times, preferably on auto-rebalance, that adjusts to more conservative as you age so that if, like me, you're firmly in "sequence of return risk" territory, you will have no care in the world because your portfolio has you protected...

alfaspider wrote: ↑Thu Mar 09, 2023 8:40 am Your portfolio doesn't need to recover if you have enough saved in the first place.

That's funny. And how would one know beforehand how much is enough?

Hey, if you've got "enough," you don't need to worry about bear markets at all--or hang around on message boards like this, talking about bear markets--because they're meaningless.

ontario102 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 01, 2023 10:40 am

cbox wrote: ↑Wed Mar 01, 2023 2:56 am

MattB wrote: ↑Wed Mar 01, 2023 1:16 am
You'll obvious do better claiming at 62 if you die at 70. But I suspect there's a crossover point not far after 78. And you'll be glad you have the larger social security payment ever year after that.

In my view, the most meaningful wildcard in this scenario--and it's so unfortunate--is Social Security itself. Simply put, no one knows whether today's SS estimates will hold up once the "fix" for SS is in (or not in).

This is a SIGNIFICANT factor in me considering claiming early and locking in; I think it's highly unlikely they would cut recipients already receiving, but my future expected claim at 70 might be in jeopardy perhaps then making me regret I didn't claim the early gains.

Exactly.

We had a nice January. But now I'm seeing stocks AND bonds down on almost a daily basis; markets are finally seeing that the Fed is hiking rates 'til inflation is crushed, or the economy is, or both. I'm thinking mid-2024 before we see a turnaround -- I'm in Sequence Of Returns Risk land! :( Glad my balanced funds are throwing off dividends for me to live on. Yup. Let this period be a lesson to the younger folks who think they can slide into retirement without a cash cushion or stream of income to allow them to weather a multi-year period in which their portfolio just goes sideways or down, down, down. When you're not earning money any longer, distributions + market downturn can = portfolio pain from which one may not recover in one's life...

More expensive cars are most costly at every turn. Get a normal Corolla or Camry and enjoy the reliability, longevity, and savings.

This is why you buy mutual funds. ETFs promote trading behavior and distract people throughout the day.

I start with Kayak.

Plane tickets are ridiculously priced now, after Covid. I think I saw that plane tickets have "inflated" the most of all consumer stuff.

Airlines are pulling the toilet paper stunt now: the prices may look similar to before, but you're getting a lot less per roll. If you want the old standard roll, you'll have to drag out your wallet and pay twice what you used to.

I just said, "oh, fig it," and bought business class. I'm too old to sit like a sardine for 10 hours.

I'd take the penalty and start earning more with that dough. I'm sure the calculator noted above will agree.

TomatoTomahto wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 6:37 am If that's a cardinal sin, I might have to go to confession.

Hurry up. I'm waiting outside the booth.

Charles Joseph wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 6:14 am I know the standard advice is to withdraw from taxable accounts first in retirement. But if one wants to leave their taxable account for heirs (for the stepped-up basis), how damaging is it to withdraw from tax-deferred first and leave taxable alone as long as possible? Is there a way to calculate this?

There's no pat answer to this question, and I've never heard the advice you're citing as "standard." Personally, I plan to withdraw from my tax-deferred as soon as I retire, well before RMDs, in order not to have huge RMDs (and tax consequences) when I'm forced to pull the money at 73.

We are having a different issue from everyone else. DH takes his RMD annually in December. He got an email from TSP about something minor so he called. He wasn't sure of exact date the RMD would be but rep took care of doing it right then and said this will satisfy RMD. Same amount as the letter we received in January 2022. No other letters received. This amount was direct deposited into checking account. About a week later he got an email saying his RMD was being taken out the next day. The amount they said was about $1500 less than what he already received. We immediately called TSP because, well, he already got his RMD! Sadly, he got another direct deposit into checking. We called again. They said they would escalate. After about four w...

MnD wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 11:35 am And meanwhile they still haven't fixed the minimum installment payment programming error for those not subject to RMD's.
It took them months to even acknowledge it was a problem and no fix a month later.

"We are in the process of addressing this issue."
Sounds like they are incapable of trouble-shooting their own code in a timely manner.

As of 03/07/2023, I see this at the Known Issues page:

Current known issues
There are no known issues at this time

Is this true?

Cash is King wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 5:30 pm
I'll add that very few people say: I'm taking SS at my FRA.

I plan to. FRA is the "optimal age" for most people to apply, according to this financial advisor (video).

For me personally, FRA makes sense, too, because it will at least give me some years of the payments currently on my SS estimates and before any potential cuts to the program, as forecast by Social Security if nothing changes by 2035 to keep the trust fund component of social security from being depleted.

It's hard to do financial planning with a big fat "I don't know what the numbers will be after 2035."

bwalling wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 7:13 am

cbox wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 6:46 am As to batteries being a reason to upgrade: Not. I'm on my third new battery for the 8 Plus. New battery is all you need to add another year or two of life. $49 at the Apple store, installed.

Just checked. They want $89 for battery replacement, and clearly state they'll force me to replace my cracked screen to get a new battery. Total cost $318.

I suppose batteries for the newer phones cost more, then. I have never paid more than $49 for an iPhone 8 Plus battery at the Apple Store (installed). To me, that's a small price to pay for getting my phone back up to peak performance for another year or two.

According to this financial advisor , "if we plan for the Social Security trust fund to be depleted in 2035, as projected, the incentive to delay Social Security retirement benefits to receive a higher monthly payment goes away." Worth a watch. OpenSocialSecurity.com has the option to include a future benefit cut in your projected benefits. And note that it does not always result in "claim at 62", depending on one's parameters. I've tried it for myself and spouse, and the recommendation was still for me to claim at 70 and my wife at 62. But: I am 64, so I would still get a few years of the higher age-70 benefit before it is cut. A younger and/or unmarried person may get different results. Honestly, if I were much younge...

My experience has been that you're less likely to get scammed by dentists who do not participate in insurance networks, which routinely pay them less than what they charge or what they need to charge to meet expenses. To make up for that shortfall, the "in plan" dentists that I have visited have always attempted to push higher cost "treatment" plans on their patients. I remember one in-plan dentist in particular, who was recommended by a colleague of mine. As someone with teeth that never gave any problems, I was shocked when I went to this person for a standard cleaning. The dentist himself did the cleaning because he didn't hire dental hygienists, and it was the worst cleaning I have ever had in my life. What he was mo...

According to this financial advisor, "if we plan for the Social Security trust fund to be depleted in 2035, as projected, the incentive to delay Social Security retirement benefits to receive a higher monthly payment goes away."

Worth a watch.

I've often heard that one gets about 8 percent more per year by waiting to claim social security. Just for grins, I tested that by looking at my latest estimate from Social Security. To my surprise, the percentage increases were almost always above 8%. Here are the numbers: 10.11% (waiting to age 65 instead of 64) 9.42% (66) 7.63% (67 - actually 66 & 10 months, FRA) 8.37% (68) 9.13% (69) 10.89% (70) Biggest percentage bump by waiting to 65 rather than 64 and again by waiting to 70 from 69. What are your percentage gains? Would be interested to know whether this holds true for everyone. Also, if I looked at social security as an income-generating asset and decided in retirement to spend down money based upon lowest yielding asset first, ...

LFOD wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 6:55 am To be at ease in retirement requires a firm financial foundation and a willingness to turn away from your previous life and embrace a new one.

Well said.

I like this a lot. This is what I struggle with as I think about this decision. I find myself trying to look at it both ways. Viewing it as an investment, I can calculate the crossover point of what age it is best to claim at and it comes down to what do I expect my lifespan to be relative to that crossover point. As an investment, FRA vs 70 doesn't matter a lot unless I live significantly less or longer than the cutover point. But if I view it as insurance, the security of having the longer benefit seems very valuable if either my investments don't perform as projected, I live much longer than anticipated or some kind of expenses (like dementia) drain our finances. Some thoughts on the bolded part: 1. "if either my investments don't ...

There are two competing trains of thought on Social Security, and one wrinkle. 1) Social Security is an investment. I put money in. I want to maximize the amount of money I take out. I calculate each decision based on its break-even date, to determine the optimal time for when a given choice would make the most financial sense. Usually this calculation results in claiming as early as possible (age 62)and investing the proceeds. (If you don't invest the proceeds and simply spend them, then the math goes back in favor of delaying.) 2) Social Security is longevity insurance. Calculating breakeven on an insurance policy (like your house insurance or car insurance) makes no sense. The objective is to maximize the amount of money that it pays ou...