FREE NEWSLETTER

Insurance can be a great defense against financial disaster. What happens when it’s contorted into an investment? It becomes the disaster.

Latest PostsAll Discussions »

One Piece Of Paper

"Thanks, Rick. What a wonderful idea for an evening together. I can only imagine how fascinating it must have been to hear everyone’s “Coming to America” story. I also like the point you made about families who arrived generations ago. Over time it’s easy to forget the courage, uncertainty, and hope that brought our ancestors here in the first place. Whether those journeys happened two hundred years ago or within our own lifetime, they’re all part of the same American story. Thank you for sharing that experience. It fits beautifully with the theme of the article."
- Andrew Clements
Read more »

Short term and long term Social Security planning

"Hey Adam, What you wrote was exactly the point I was getting at. We have already made multiple financial sacrifices since we began our journey to retirement which depended a lot on what we were promised from Social Security. At this point I do not believe it would be fair to cut our benefits more, no matter our wealth. We were told when we began working what the deal was, then they changed it. It was early enough that we could make changes to our financial plans to accommodate the changes. But a this point we should get what we’re were told we were getting after contributing for decades. Those who were already, or close to retirement age were not subject to benefit cuts from the 1983 law, and neither should we. We have already made financial sacrifices to get us to this point in time. Enough is enough. If there are going to be further cuts in benefits and raises in taxation let younger people who have time to adapt their financial plans be the people to sacrifice to ensure their future beyond, just like we were asked to do in the past."
- DavidHLancaster
Read more »

How Did You Find Paid Work After Retiring from Your Primary Career?

"Thank you all for sharing your experiences and advice. I really appreciate the time you took to respond. One theme that stood out to me was how many opportunities came through relationships and simply staying engaged with the community, rather than through a traditional job search. That's given me a different perspective on what my next chapter might look like. I wish everyone continued health and happiness in retirement."
- Jeffrey Chan
Read more »

When your 401(k) excludes target date funds

"Gee whiz, Jack, such a thing would never happen. Would it? If not kickbacks, perhaps some serious schmoozing; golf outings, nice dinners….. The plan described here reminds me of the plans that were common in the  early  days of the 401(k).  Lots of good advice so far. Get the employer match, keep rollover proceeds in a designated IRA, and buy  that cheap, yet important umbrella insurance. "
- DAN SMITH
Read more »

Taking a Loss?

"Rob - What you are describing is interesting. Would you describe how your ladder was originally structured in 2017?"
- S Sevcik
Read more »

$400,000 Mistake

BOB MADE A very expensive tax mistake. Doctors told Bob that he only has a year to live… What did Bob do?

He decided to gift a house to his only son before passing away. The house is worth $2,000,000 that he bought back in 1970 for $50,000 in an expensive suburb of California.

The son decided to sell the house and paid about $430,000 in federal taxes.

$430,000 that could have been $0 instead…

How?

When you gift a property to someone, they receive a "carryover basis." It basically means the same price the original owner purchased it for.

The basis of that house was $50,000, so the son had to pay capital gains tax on the difference between the $2 million sale price and the basis, at rates reaching up to 23.8% on the top portion of the gain. But this is where a step-up in basis could come into play.

Assets such as a house or shares held in a brokerage account, when owned inside an estate rather than an irrevocable trust, receive a step-up in basis to their fair market value (FMV) at the time of the decedent's death, per IRC Section 1014. In our case, if Bob held that house in his own name, passed away, and his son received the house, he would've gotten a step-up in basis to the current value, or $2M.

At the time of the sale, if sold for $2M, he would pay $0 in federal taxes, though state tax might still apply. That's about $430,000 of "savings."

"But who cares, Bob is dead anyways?"

While true, many parents still want to make sure their children don't have to pay half a million in taxes. They want their children to enjoy the fruits of their hard labor.

Specifics

The step-up in basis can be a bit nuanced, depending on how the assets are held and titled.

First, the step-up in basis typically adjusts to the market value, unless an election is made to use the value six months after the date of death, subject to certain rules.

The step-up in basis also doesn't apply to assets held in an irrevocable trust , though we will cover some strategies for that later, or to assets held in qualified retirement accounts, such as IRAs and 401(k)s.

In a community property state (Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin), the basis steps up whenever a spouse dies. You will typically need to complete a form to receive this step-up in a brokerage account. 

For assets held in joint tenancy, the step-up applies only to the deceased partner's share. For example, Bob and Jenice have a house worth $300,000 with a $50,000 basis. After Bob passes away, Jenice will have a $175,000 basis in the house, calculated as ($300,000 minus $50,000) divided by two, plus $50,000.

There are also two additional things to keep in mind:

1. Living on the right assets

Bob, age 75, has two accounts: a traditional 401(k) worth $500,000 and a brokerage account worth $500,000. Bob's diagnosis isn't good.

From a tax-planning perspective, it might make a lot more sense to withdraw, say, $50,000 a year from the 401(k) to live on, $20,000 of which would be required minimum distributions (RMDs), and pass down the brokerage account to his beneficiaries.

This is because the brokerage account likely has a lot of gains. Bob bought many stocks in his 30s and 40s that could be stepped up now. But a more in-depth analysis might be needed if Bob has a lot of income and is in a high marginal tax bracket.

2. Selling the right lots

Say Bob has a $500,000 brokerage account. Some of the stock purchases have a low basis, meaning a lot of capital gains, and some have a high basis, meaning fewer capital gains.

It's best to sell the high-basis stocks, which come with a lower capital gains tax, and pass down the low-basis stocks to the beneficiaries.

Planning matters. These mistakes can cost thousands of dollars in unnecessary taxes. As always, make sure to consult a licensed CPA or estate attorney with your unique circumstances.

 

Bogdan Sheremeta is a licensed CPA based in Illinois with experience at Deloitte and a Fortune 200 multinational.  
Read more »

Yet-Another Social Security Spreadsheet Analysis on what Age to Start taking Benefits

"Thats a good point. We don't need it ourselves, but I am aware of others for whom it could be useful. As a retired physician, and unfortunately now as a consumer of healthcare myself, I second your opinion about Medicare and supplemental policy."
- Jack Hannam
Read more »

Beware the CFP Designation?

"A CFA would be top-notch, but they generally don't work with individual clients."
- Ormode
Read more »

Social Security

AT FIRST GLANCE, Social Security appears straightforward. During our working years, we pay into it, and in retirement, it sends us a monthly check, guaranteed for life. Unfortunately, it isn’t always so simple. Below are five aspects of the system that are frequently misunderstood. Benefits estimates. Look at a Social Security statement, and an easy-to-read chart provides estimates of the benefits available at various ages. The heading above the chart reads, “Personalized Monthly Retirement Benefit Estimates Depending on the Age You Start.” That seems clear. But there’s a caveat that can make the chart misleading. Off to the side, there’s a further explanation that reads: “These personalized estimates are based on your earnings to date and assume you continue to earn [your most recently reported salary] per year until you start your benefits.” The numbers shown, in other words, are not guaranteed.  Why would the statements be presented this way? It’s because the Social Security Administration can’t predict when any given person will stop working, so for simplicity of presentation, it assumes that someone will continue working and continue earning the same income each year into the future and will then retire and immediately claim benefits. For most people, this isn’t how it works out, but Social Security has no way to know what each person will choose. That’s why benefits statements shouldn’t be taken at face value. How can you forecast your actual benefit? Fortunately, Social Security’s website provides a calculator that allows custom calculations based on actual retirement expectations. Continuing to work. Some people worry that there would be a negative impact if they chose to continue working after claiming Social Security. This concern isn’t totally unfounded. It’s known as the Social Security earnings test, but there are some details to be aware of. First, the earnings test doesn’t apply after a worker reaches Full Retirement Age. And second, to the extent that benefits are reduced in the years before FRA, Social Security will add back those amounts to future checks. So working while on Social Security shouldn’t be viewed as so problematic. Maximum benefit. All things being equal, Social Security retirement benefits increase with each year that you wait, up until age 70. This is broadly understood. The problem, though, is that oftentimes people view it almost as a rule to wait until 70, but that isn’t always the best choice. For married couples, especially where one spouse has accumulated a larger benefit, there are two reasons why one spouse might claim earlier than 70. The first relates to what’s known as the spousal benefit. This is a feature that originated in the days when more families had just one working spouse, and it provides a benefit to spouses who haven’t worked the requisite 10 years to earn a benefit. In general, the spousal benefit is equal to half of the higher-earning spouse’s benefit at their Full Retirement Age (FRA), which is now age 67 for most people. The only requirement is that the lower-earning spouse can’t start benefits until the higher-earning spouse has started his or her own benefit. The spousal benefit is terrific, but a commonly misunderstood limitation is that—unlike a worker’s own benefit—it doesn’t continue to increase each year until age 70. It hits a maximum at the spouse’s FRA. For that reason, it’s important for a spouse to not delay beyond that point.  Even when both spouses have accrued their own benefits, it often makes sense for the spouse with the smaller benefit to claim somewhat earlier than 70. To understand why, we need to look at it from the perspective of the higher earning spouse’s benefit. Because that benefit would also be available to the lower-earning spouse in the form of a survivor’s benefit (discussed further below), that larger benefit will be available to either spouse as long as either is living. The smaller benefit, on the other hand, has value only while both spouses are living. And while it’s unfortunate to say, that is statistically less likely. For that reason, I generally recommend that the lower-earning spouse claim at, or around, Full Retirement Age. When to claim. In most conversations about Social Security, people tend to talk about claiming decisions in round numbers—claiming at 67 or 68, for example. The reality, though, is that you can claim at any time between ages 62 and 70. You don’t need to wait for your birthday, and the benefit simply increases by a bit for each month that you wait. I find this helpful because it allows flexibility in how we think about claiming. Not sure whether to start at 67 or 68? You can easily split the difference. Survivor benefits. To understand how the survivor benefit works, imagine a married couple, Joe and Jane. Joe’s benefit is $5,000 per month, and Jane’s is $4,000. Now suppose that Joe passes away. At that point, Jane wouldn’t be able to claim the combined total of $9,000. However, she could claim a survivor’s benefit that would increase her monthly check from $4,000 to $5,000, matching what Joe was receiving. That’s the simplest case, but the survivor benefit decision is often more complicated because it also depends on the age of the survivor. Survivor benefits can be claimed as early as age 60, and that can be helpful in certain situations, but there’s also a penalty for claiming too early. Benefits can be reduced by nearly 30%. In other words, and importantly, Jane wouldn’t automatically be entitled to $5,000 just because that was what Joe was receiving. When would Jane be able to claim the full $5,000? For this determination, Social Security uses a yardstick known as the Full Retirement Age for Survivors. This isn’t exactly the same as the standard FRA, but it’s close. (Social Security provides a calculator to look it up.) What might this look like in practice? Suppose Jane were a year shy of the FRA for survivors at the time that Joe died. In this case, Jane would have a choice. She could claim her survivor’s benefit at that time, but her total check would come out to somewhat less than $5,000. Fortunately, Social Security doesn’t automatically turn on survivor benefits when a spouse dies, thus providing survivors more control. In Jane’s case, she might continue with her own benefit of $4,000 per month for one more year. Then, once she became eligible for 100% of the survivor’s benefit, she could claim the full $1,000 to reach $5,000.   Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam's Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

Before Someone Else Decides

"Thanks for the suggestions! They’re exactly the kinds of things I love to do. Seems like my efforts yesterday put me on the path to some good outcomes. i meant this as a reply to David below, but learning about some different care options is also good."
- Marilyn Lavin
Read more »

Inflation, prices, COLAs, retirement and the last 16 years

"You’re right it was 1984. I was thinking of something else. My mistake."
- R Quinn
Read more »

Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS) are a Generational Bargain Right Now

"Howard, very good explanation about TIPs and the current “positive for investors “ auction. I did some research on Tipswatch.com (as suggested here by others) and found this very good article by David Enna explaining the benefits/ risks and workings of the current TIPS auction. I sent this to my FA who I have a call with this week to discuss if it might be appropriate for our portfolio. thanks again. https://tipswatch.com/2026/07/23/10-year-tips-auction-gets-real-yield-of-2-438-a-great-result-for-investors/"
- luvtoride44afe9eb1e
Read more »

One Piece Of Paper

"Thanks, Rick. What a wonderful idea for an evening together. I can only imagine how fascinating it must have been to hear everyone’s “Coming to America” story. I also like the point you made about families who arrived generations ago. Over time it’s easy to forget the courage, uncertainty, and hope that brought our ancestors here in the first place. Whether those journeys happened two hundred years ago or within our own lifetime, they’re all part of the same American story. Thank you for sharing that experience. It fits beautifully with the theme of the article."
- Andrew Clements
Read more »

Short term and long term Social Security planning

"Hey Adam, What you wrote was exactly the point I was getting at. We have already made multiple financial sacrifices since we began our journey to retirement which depended a lot on what we were promised from Social Security. At this point I do not believe it would be fair to cut our benefits more, no matter our wealth. We were told when we began working what the deal was, then they changed it. It was early enough that we could make changes to our financial plans to accommodate the changes. But a this point we should get what we’re were told we were getting after contributing for decades. Those who were already, or close to retirement age were not subject to benefit cuts from the 1983 law, and neither should we. We have already made financial sacrifices to get us to this point in time. Enough is enough. If there are going to be further cuts in benefits and raises in taxation let younger people who have time to adapt their financial plans be the people to sacrifice to ensure their future beyond, just like we were asked to do in the past."
- DavidHLancaster
Read more »

How Did You Find Paid Work After Retiring from Your Primary Career?

"Thank you all for sharing your experiences and advice. I really appreciate the time you took to respond. One theme that stood out to me was how many opportunities came through relationships and simply staying engaged with the community, rather than through a traditional job search. That's given me a different perspective on what my next chapter might look like. I wish everyone continued health and happiness in retirement."
- Jeffrey Chan
Read more »

When your 401(k) excludes target date funds

"Gee whiz, Jack, such a thing would never happen. Would it? If not kickbacks, perhaps some serious schmoozing; golf outings, nice dinners….. The plan described here reminds me of the plans that were common in the  early  days of the 401(k).  Lots of good advice so far. Get the employer match, keep rollover proceeds in a designated IRA, and buy  that cheap, yet important umbrella insurance. "
- DAN SMITH
Read more »

Taking a Loss?

"Rob - What you are describing is interesting. Would you describe how your ladder was originally structured in 2017?"
- S Sevcik
Read more »

$400,000 Mistake

BOB MADE A very expensive tax mistake. Doctors told Bob that he only has a year to live… What did Bob do?

He decided to gift a house to his only son before passing away. The house is worth $2,000,000 that he bought back in 1970 for $50,000 in an expensive suburb of California.

The son decided to sell the house and paid about $430,000 in federal taxes.

$430,000 that could have been $0 instead…

How?

When you gift a property to someone, they receive a "carryover basis." It basically means the same price the original owner purchased it for.

The basis of that house was $50,000, so the son had to pay capital gains tax on the difference between the $2 million sale price and the basis, at rates reaching up to 23.8% on the top portion of the gain. But this is where a step-up in basis could come into play.

Assets such as a house or shares held in a brokerage account, when owned inside an estate rather than an irrevocable trust, receive a step-up in basis to their fair market value (FMV) at the time of the decedent's death, per IRC Section 1014. In our case, if Bob held that house in his own name, passed away, and his son received the house, he would've gotten a step-up in basis to the current value, or $2M.

At the time of the sale, if sold for $2M, he would pay $0 in federal taxes, though state tax might still apply. That's about $430,000 of "savings."

"But who cares, Bob is dead anyways?"

While true, many parents still want to make sure their children don't have to pay half a million in taxes. They want their children to enjoy the fruits of their hard labor.

Specifics

The step-up in basis can be a bit nuanced, depending on how the assets are held and titled.

First, the step-up in basis typically adjusts to the market value, unless an election is made to use the value six months after the date of death, subject to certain rules.

The step-up in basis also doesn't apply to assets held in an irrevocable trust , though we will cover some strategies for that later, or to assets held in qualified retirement accounts, such as IRAs and 401(k)s.

In a community property state (Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin), the basis steps up whenever a spouse dies. You will typically need to complete a form to receive this step-up in a brokerage account. 

For assets held in joint tenancy, the step-up applies only to the deceased partner's share. For example, Bob and Jenice have a house worth $300,000 with a $50,000 basis. After Bob passes away, Jenice will have a $175,000 basis in the house, calculated as ($300,000 minus $50,000) divided by two, plus $50,000.

There are also two additional things to keep in mind:

1. Living on the right assets

Bob, age 75, has two accounts: a traditional 401(k) worth $500,000 and a brokerage account worth $500,000. Bob's diagnosis isn't good.

From a tax-planning perspective, it might make a lot more sense to withdraw, say, $50,000 a year from the 401(k) to live on, $20,000 of which would be required minimum distributions (RMDs), and pass down the brokerage account to his beneficiaries.

This is because the brokerage account likely has a lot of gains. Bob bought many stocks in his 30s and 40s that could be stepped up now. But a more in-depth analysis might be needed if Bob has a lot of income and is in a high marginal tax bracket.

2. Selling the right lots

Say Bob has a $500,000 brokerage account. Some of the stock purchases have a low basis, meaning a lot of capital gains, and some have a high basis, meaning fewer capital gains.

It's best to sell the high-basis stocks, which come with a lower capital gains tax, and pass down the low-basis stocks to the beneficiaries.

Planning matters. These mistakes can cost thousands of dollars in unnecessary taxes. As always, make sure to consult a licensed CPA or estate attorney with your unique circumstances.

 

Bogdan Sheremeta is a licensed CPA based in Illinois with experience at Deloitte and a Fortune 200 multinational.  
Read more »

Yet-Another Social Security Spreadsheet Analysis on what Age to Start taking Benefits

"Thats a good point. We don't need it ourselves, but I am aware of others for whom it could be useful. As a retired physician, and unfortunately now as a consumer of healthcare myself, I second your opinion about Medicare and supplemental policy."
- Jack Hannam
Read more »

Beware the CFP Designation?

"A CFA would be top-notch, but they generally don't work with individual clients."
- Ormode
Read more »

Social Security

AT FIRST GLANCE, Social Security appears straightforward. During our working years, we pay into it, and in retirement, it sends us a monthly check, guaranteed for life. Unfortunately, it isn’t always so simple. Below are five aspects of the system that are frequently misunderstood. Benefits estimates. Look at a Social Security statement, and an easy-to-read chart provides estimates of the benefits available at various ages. The heading above the chart reads, “Personalized Monthly Retirement Benefit Estimates Depending on the Age You Start.” That seems clear. But there’s a caveat that can make the chart misleading. Off to the side, there’s a further explanation that reads: “These personalized estimates are based on your earnings to date and assume you continue to earn [your most recently reported salary] per year until you start your benefits.” The numbers shown, in other words, are not guaranteed.  Why would the statements be presented this way? It’s because the Social Security Administration can’t predict when any given person will stop working, so for simplicity of presentation, it assumes that someone will continue working and continue earning the same income each year into the future and will then retire and immediately claim benefits. For most people, this isn’t how it works out, but Social Security has no way to know what each person will choose. That’s why benefits statements shouldn’t be taken at face value. How can you forecast your actual benefit? Fortunately, Social Security’s website provides a calculator that allows custom calculations based on actual retirement expectations. Continuing to work. Some people worry that there would be a negative impact if they chose to continue working after claiming Social Security. This concern isn’t totally unfounded. It’s known as the Social Security earnings test, but there are some details to be aware of. First, the earnings test doesn’t apply after a worker reaches Full Retirement Age. And second, to the extent that benefits are reduced in the years before FRA, Social Security will add back those amounts to future checks. So working while on Social Security shouldn’t be viewed as so problematic. Maximum benefit. All things being equal, Social Security retirement benefits increase with each year that you wait, up until age 70. This is broadly understood. The problem, though, is that oftentimes people view it almost as a rule to wait until 70, but that isn’t always the best choice. For married couples, especially where one spouse has accumulated a larger benefit, there are two reasons why one spouse might claim earlier than 70. The first relates to what’s known as the spousal benefit. This is a feature that originated in the days when more families had just one working spouse, and it provides a benefit to spouses who haven’t worked the requisite 10 years to earn a benefit. In general, the spousal benefit is equal to half of the higher-earning spouse’s benefit at their Full Retirement Age (FRA), which is now age 67 for most people. The only requirement is that the lower-earning spouse can’t start benefits until the higher-earning spouse has started his or her own benefit. The spousal benefit is terrific, but a commonly misunderstood limitation is that—unlike a worker’s own benefit—it doesn’t continue to increase each year until age 70. It hits a maximum at the spouse’s FRA. For that reason, it’s important for a spouse to not delay beyond that point.  Even when both spouses have accrued their own benefits, it often makes sense for the spouse with the smaller benefit to claim somewhat earlier than 70. To understand why, we need to look at it from the perspective of the higher earning spouse’s benefit. Because that benefit would also be available to the lower-earning spouse in the form of a survivor’s benefit (discussed further below), that larger benefit will be available to either spouse as long as either is living. The smaller benefit, on the other hand, has value only while both spouses are living. And while it’s unfortunate to say, that is statistically less likely. For that reason, I generally recommend that the lower-earning spouse claim at, or around, Full Retirement Age. When to claim. In most conversations about Social Security, people tend to talk about claiming decisions in round numbers—claiming at 67 or 68, for example. The reality, though, is that you can claim at any time between ages 62 and 70. You don’t need to wait for your birthday, and the benefit simply increases by a bit for each month that you wait. I find this helpful because it allows flexibility in how we think about claiming. Not sure whether to start at 67 or 68? You can easily split the difference. Survivor benefits. To understand how the survivor benefit works, imagine a married couple, Joe and Jane. Joe’s benefit is $5,000 per month, and Jane’s is $4,000. Now suppose that Joe passes away. At that point, Jane wouldn’t be able to claim the combined total of $9,000. However, she could claim a survivor’s benefit that would increase her monthly check from $4,000 to $5,000, matching what Joe was receiving. That’s the simplest case, but the survivor benefit decision is often more complicated because it also depends on the age of the survivor. Survivor benefits can be claimed as early as age 60, and that can be helpful in certain situations, but there’s also a penalty for claiming too early. Benefits can be reduced by nearly 30%. In other words, and importantly, Jane wouldn’t automatically be entitled to $5,000 just because that was what Joe was receiving. When would Jane be able to claim the full $5,000? For this determination, Social Security uses a yardstick known as the Full Retirement Age for Survivors. This isn’t exactly the same as the standard FRA, but it’s close. (Social Security provides a calculator to look it up.) What might this look like in practice? Suppose Jane were a year shy of the FRA for survivors at the time that Joe died. In this case, Jane would have a choice. She could claim her survivor’s benefit at that time, but her total check would come out to somewhat less than $5,000. Fortunately, Social Security doesn’t automatically turn on survivor benefits when a spouse dies, thus providing survivors more control. In Jane’s case, she might continue with her own benefit of $4,000 per month for one more year. Then, once she became eligible for 100% of the survivor’s benefit, she could claim the full $1,000 to reach $5,000.   Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam's Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

Free Newsletter

Get Educated

Manifesto

NO. 41: VERY FEW of us need life insurance for our entire life. That’s why term insurance makes sense and cash-value policies are usually a mistake—despite what insurance agents say.

act

CHECK YOUR Social Security statement to get an estimate of benefits and make sure your earnings record is correct. The easiest way to do this: Set up a “my Social Security” account, preferably adding two-factor authentication. This will also preempt scammers, who might otherwise try to set up an account in your name—and claim your benefits.

Truths

NO. 49: YOU CAN have stability of principal and stability of income but, in a liquid investment, you can't have both. Money-market funds and savings accounts offer stability of principal, but the rate paid can quickly rise and fall. Most bonds, by contrast, pay the same amount of interest each year until maturity, but they can fluctuate sharply in price.

think

ANCHORING. Imagine the S&P 500 is up 20% over the past year. You might balk at buying stocks, because you’re anchored on the market’s old level and feel you’re overpaying at current prices. Or imagine your neighbors sold their home two years ago for $300,000. You might be reluctant to accept less for your home, even if property prices have since fallen.

Homes

Manifesto

NO. 41: VERY FEW of us need life insurance for our entire life. That’s why term insurance makes sense and cash-value policies are usually a mistake—despite what insurance agents say.

Spotlight: Spending

Money, Happiness, and Choice

FOR DECADES, RESEARCHERS have been looking at the link between money and happiness. The findings? In short, it’s a mixed bag.
To be sure, there are ways that money can boost happiness, and below are some ideas to consider. But there are also obstacles to contend with. We’ll look first at the obstacles before turning to the recommendations. 
The most significant challenge is the fact that—to a great extent—our happiness level is hard-wired into us.

Read more »

Top Five Expense Categories and Inflation Factor

Dan’s post ‘Insomnia and the Back of an Envelope’ motivated me to review our expenses.  Our top five categories are property taxes, home/car insurance, utilities, groceries, and healthcare premiums/deductibles.

Our home property taxes increased 23% from 2023 to 2025 while our home value increase 17%. The value of our ten-acre plot went down 1.6% from 2023 to 2024, but then increased 23.5% from 2024 to 2025 and property taxes increased by 30%.
Home insurance went up 46% from 2023 to 2025,

Read more »

Detailed tracking expenses and spending. Is there real value?

This is not criticism, it’s an inquiry.
Over the years I have read many times on HD about tracking expenses/spending. Some people pursue this in great detail, some seem to approach it like a hobby. There may be something motivating in knowing how every penny is spent. 
As you may suspect, I don’t know in detail where or how we spend our money. As long as the big picture is in balance I am happy. 
What I do know is the bank balance is $X at the end of the month,

Read more »

Take a Seat

MILESTONES MARK the growth of a child as she moves from infancy through school age. In similar fashion, we adults tend to measure our life’s progress with “firsts” or other significant events. Perhaps we remember the feeling of maturity that came with our first kiss or our first job. Milestones help us attach meaning to the course of a life that sometimes seems beyond our control.
Financial milestones often command special significance, like my first “real” job at age 15.

Read more »

Where Next? What Next?

Suppose money were no object. If you could go anywhere in the world on your next trip, where would it be? If you could savor any experience, what would it be?

Read more »

The Illusion of Wealth

I was sitting on the deck of my holiday home, enjoying the morning sunshine and breakfast, when a deep rumble announced the arrival of an expensive, sporty car. It was my neighbour. He’s a very nice man in his 40s who always dresses impeccably, with two well-turned-out kids and an immaculate wife – to all intents and purposes, a family living the dream.
Contrast that with me: I drive a seven-year-old SUV with 70,000 miles on the clock,

Read more »

Spotlight: Sayler

Super Old

FINANCIAL ADVISORS used to suggest a 20-year planning horizon for retirement. Now, most advisors say to plan for a 30-year retirement. From my own experience, I believe 40 years should be the norm, and 50 years isn’t unreasonable. If we plan for the longest possible life expectancy, we’ll almost always die with money left over. That’s far better than the alternative—living longer than planned and running out of money. People who live to 100 are called centenarians. The term supercentenarian describes those who are at least 110. While not common, supercentenarians are becoming less rare. My grandmother, Hazel Blecha, passed away a month before reaching age 112. She was born in November 1894 and passed away in October 2006, so she lived in three centuries—the 19th, 20th and 21st. The Gerontology Research Group used to keep a list of verified supercentenarians. Unfortunately, its list is no longer updated regularly. When my grandmother turned 109, we contacted the site and asked if we should start the verification process. We were told to wait. Most people who reach 109 don’t make it to 110. Nonetheless, we started the verification process a few months before she turned 110. The group wanted documentation of her birth date, her change of name when she married and her current identity. The county where she was born didn’t have birth records going back to the 1800s. Her father, however, published the local newspaper. When she was born, he made sure there was a birth announcement in the paper. We also had her marriage certificate to verify her name change and her passport to verify her current identity. The Gerontology Research Group checks this data carefully because some older people exaggerate their age. This is nothing new. Englishman Tom Parr died in 1635, reportedly at the age of…
Read more »

Three Mistakes

DURING MY NEARLY 70 trips around the sun, I have made countless mistakes. Most have been minor, but three stand out. Two I have already made, and the third I’m about to make. Mistake No. 1: Go-Kart. When I was 12 years old, I bought a go-kart. It has a fiberglass body and was built to resemble the car driven to victory by legendary driver Jim Clark in the 1965 Indianapolis 500. It cost $300. I used the money I’d saved from my paper route. A friend and I would take it to an elementary school three blocks from our home and drive it for hours. More than 50 years later, I still have that go-kart. I assumed our kids would enjoy it. But we were living in Southern California at the time and there was no place they could take it out on their own. I was busy at work and our kids had their own interests. We never used it. Years went by. Grandchildren have now used it, but only a few times. I need to get rid of it. It’s taking up space and it isn’t getting used, and yet I’m emotionally attached to it. My children and grandchildren don’t want it. It would be hard to sell to a stranger for even a few hundred dollars. It wasn’t a mistake to purchase the go-kart. Rather, my mistake was not selling it when I got my driver’s license and largely lost interest in it. Mistake No. 2: Caboose. Until recently, we owned a full-size railroad caboose, parked on 40 feet of railroad track. Twenty years ago, my wife showed me an ad in the paper. “Look, someone has a caboose for sale,” she said. “Who would want a caboose?” My response: “Let me see that.” The caboose…
Read more »

Making a Difference

OUR FOUR CHILDREN are adopted. After we’d been married several years, we were dismayed that my wife hadn’t conceived. Through testing, we found that we were both essentially infertile. As one doctor put it, “It’s good you are married to each other.” We decided not to pursue surrogacy, in vitro fertilization or similar options. I thought our life was on an even keel until one day my wife asked, “When you get to be 65, do you want to say that your life amounted only to working for your current employer and making money?” My employer was ethical and produced products that helped society. I was happy with my job. I told my wife that I was okay with that. This was not the right answer. After more discussion, we decided to take in foster children. We began the process to be approved as foster parents. We both had master’s degrees and good jobs. But we decided that, if we took in foster children, my wife would quit her job to focus on the children. On July 5, 1988, a California social worker brought us two cute, lively sisters, four-and-a-half and six years old. Each was carrying a plastic trash bag containing all her earthly possessions. Foster parents are paid, and it can provide significant supplemental tax-free income. These two girls had been living with an older single woman. In subsequent weeks, the girls said that at times their previous caregiver locked them in the backyard so they wouldn’t bother her. She would open the door long enough to hand them a sandwich for lunch. These two girls had two brothers, one younger and one older. The two boys were each in separate foster homes. In most cases, the goal of foster care is the reunification of families. Every week, someone…
Read more »

It Also Has Wheels

WE'VE OWNED OUR NEW 2023 Toyota Highlander Hybrid for six weeks. The technology and features are breath-taking. Until now, both of our vehicles were 18 years old. I feel like Rip Van Winkle, waking up in a time I do not recognize. Here are some of the bells and whistles on our new SUV, and my evaluation of their usefulness. Please forgive me if some of this information isn’t accurate; I’m still learning about these features. Automatic parking brake engagement and automatic headlight dimming. Every time we put the vehicle in park, it automatically activates the parking brake. At night, the headlights automatically dim if there’s oncoming traffic or if we’re following another vehicle. Both of these are useful but unnecessary. I know how to set the parking brake; I know how to dim the lights. Blind spot monitor. This is one feature I really like. A yellow icon appears on our outside left or right mirror if there’s a vehicle in our blind spot on that side. When passing another vehicle, it confirms that I have gone far enough around the other vehicle to pull safely back to the right lane. Cross-traffic alert. When I’m backing out of a driveway or out of a parking spot, there is both a visual and audible alarm if a vehicle or person is approaching. Nice, but not necessary. Driving position memory. This feature automatically adjusts the driver’s seat and outside rearview mirrors to suit your preferences. Because of the chip shortage, we were given only one key. A second key will be sent to us at some indefinite future time. When my wife and I each have our own key, the driver’s seat and outside rearview mirrors will automatically go to the positions last used by the driver with that key. This…
Read more »

Somebody Has to Win

HOW DO YOU COMPETE in an investment contest when you’re a firm believer that investors can’t consistently beat the market averages? That was my dilemma several years ago. A school not far from where I taught was given money by an alumnus to endow the St. Louis Area Collegiate Investment Contest. All colleges and universities in the area are invited to participate in the competition, which is held regularly. Each is given a hypothetical $1 million and asked to select 20 value stocks. An outside investment firm oversees the contest. They “invest” $50,000 in each of the 20 stocks. Whoever’s portfolio is worth the most two years later wins $10,000—real dollars, that is. How do we select the 20 stocks for our entry? When I explain the contest to students, I also discuss the evidence that most investors don’t outperform the market. I suggest we could tape the stock pages of The Wall Street Journal to the wall and literally throw darts at it. Several students like this option. But instead, I distribute Value Line’s current list of 100 stocks most likely to outperform the stock market over the next year. To focus on value stocks, I take these 100 stocks deemed most likely to outperform, circle the 40 or so companies with the lowest price-earnings ratios and ask students to select stocks from this list. Value Line Investment Survey, which is often available at larger libraries, evaluates approximately 1,700 stocks. Value Line gives each stock a timeliness rating from one to five, indicating its belief that the stock will outperform the market over the next year. My initial list for the students draws on those stocks rated one for timeliness. Rating             Number of Stocks    Meaning 1                      100                             Most likely to outperform 2                      300 3                      900 4                      300 5                     …
Read more »

Lost in Translation

IN THE 1980s, I SPENT nearly 12 weeks in an Australian hospital. I learned that language is not always universal. I was a corporate auditor for General Electric, and the company had sent me to Australia for a three-month assignment. To Yankee ears, Australians have an accent. But at least we speak the same language. Or so I thought. Within a week of getting to Australia, I was diagnosed with subacute bacterial endocarditis (SBE), a serious bacterial infection of the blood. I was born with a slight heart defect which makes me more susceptible to SBE. Prior to about 1955, it was universally fatal. I don’t blame the Aussies for my infection. I’m pretty sure I contracted it before going to Australia. The general practitioner said I needed to go to a hospital and be hooked up to intravenous penicillin 24/7. I could go to a private hospital, which would be more like a U.S. hospital, or to a hospital for veterans. I asked which had the best equipment and doctors. He said the veterans’ hospital, so I went to Concord Repatriation General Hospital in Sydney. I had never been in the military. I have no idea why I was allowed to be treated at an Australian veterans’ hospital. Nurses are not nurses. There were no private or even semi-private rooms in the hospital. I was in a ward with 24 beds. Nurses would walk up and down between the rows. If we needed something, it was not unusual to call out for the nurse. I heard other patients call out “nurse” or “sister.”  Thinking “sister” was somewhat derogatory, I always said “nurse.” One day, the head “nurse” confronted me.  She asked why I called her a nurse; she was a sister. I learned that, in Australia, “nurse” refers to…
Read more »