What has always confounded me is why the super rich want so much more. The desperate need to have more by the super wealthy, even at the expense of the super needy, is a problem. We see the huge tax cuts, the policies that reduce restrictions on corporations to increase the bottom line, all to increase their net worth. I guess the old saying “he who dies with the most toys wins” is, sadly, true for the top .01%
I don’t own the classic dividend stock or ETF, but some of the stocks and ETFs I own do pay dividends, most of which are qualified. I stopped reinvesting the dividends and now have the cash available if needed. It’s a great way to have access to cash without liquidating an investment. I think it may be a great strategy for you.
I suspect the size of a portfolio is important. If it is substantial enough that you can still live comfortably after a 50% downturn, then 100% in equities would not be a problem.
Excellent article. When younger and working we had 100% equity portfolio. Upon retirement reduced it and it is now 73% equities. The rest is for the worst case scenarios you outlined, designed to carry us through a prolonged downturn. My IRA is where the liquid assets are (MM and ultra-short term bond ETF), and the RMD alone covers all our expenses. Then we have 2 SS and dividends that kick in.
We don’t have a pension, but our SS, dividends and my RMD give us more than enough. No annuities for us. Only bonds are VUSB, (VG ultra short term ETF), paying 4.3 % now, in my IRA along with VG federal MM.
Equities and MM do the job. I can see that annuities make sense for some, depending on their situations.
One solution may be to take a large chunk from the IRA in a given year, up to a bracket you are comfortable paying. Pay that year’s income tax and 2 years down the road pay the higher IRMAA. Doing this once or twice (rather than small amounts yearly that still exceed IRMAA limits) may eliminate or reduce the widow tax and yearly IRMAA increases also down the road. Take the hit in one year rather than exceeding IRMAA every year.
We always bought homes we could afford, but only if we really liked them. We spend so much time in our homes, there’s no way we would settle for less. Of course not everyone is in a position to afford the house they want. As retirees, we are in a home much larger than what 2 people need, but it is what we want. Downsizing to a smaller home to reduce expenses and upkeep would make our everyday experiences less enjoyable.
Same here. My daughter got married at the Ritz Carlton in Sarasota, on the beach. Less than 5 years later, divorced. Second marriage they eloped. No costs at all. Still married 8 years later. Fortunately we could afford it, but many cannot, and the prices are indeed outrageous.
Comments
What has always confounded me is why the super rich want so much more. The desperate need to have more by the super wealthy, even at the expense of the super needy, is a problem. We see the huge tax cuts, the policies that reduce restrictions on corporations to increase the bottom line, all to increase their net worth. I guess the old saying “he who dies with the most toys wins” is, sadly, true for the top .01%
Post: Rich or Wealthy?
Link to comment from October 10, 2026
I don’t own the classic dividend stock or ETF, but some of the stocks and ETFs I own do pay dividends, most of which are qualified. I stopped reinvesting the dividends and now have the cash available if needed. It’s a great way to have access to cash without liquidating an investment. I think it may be a great strategy for you.
Post: Strategic Retirement Income
Link to comment from October 10, 2026
I suspect the size of a portfolio is important. If it is substantial enough that you can still live comfortably after a 50% downturn, then 100% in equities would not be a problem.
Post: Why Bonds Matter
Link to comment from October 3, 2026
Excellent article. When younger and working we had 100% equity portfolio. Upon retirement reduced it and it is now 73% equities. The rest is for the worst case scenarios you outlined, designed to carry us through a prolonged downturn. My IRA is where the liquid assets are (MM and ultra-short term bond ETF), and the RMD alone covers all our expenses. Then we have 2 SS and dividends that kick in.
Post: Why Bonds Matter
Link to comment from October 3, 2026
We don’t have a pension, but our SS, dividends and my RMD give us more than enough. No annuities for us. Only bonds are VUSB, (VG ultra short term ETF), paying 4.3 % now, in my IRA along with VG federal MM. Equities and MM do the job. I can see that annuities make sense for some, depending on their situations.
Post: Is now the time for an annuity?
Link to comment from October 3, 2026
One solution may be to take a large chunk from the IRA in a given year, up to a bracket you are comfortable paying. Pay that year’s income tax and 2 years down the road pay the higher IRMAA. Doing this once or twice (rather than small amounts yearly that still exceed IRMAA limits) may eliminate or reduce the widow tax and yearly IRMAA increases also down the road. Take the hit in one year rather than exceeding IRMAA every year.
Post: Is a Roth conversion an optimal strategy in my situation?
Link to comment from September 19, 2026
We always bought homes we could afford, but only if we really liked them. We spend so much time in our homes, there’s no way we would settle for less. Of course not everyone is in a position to afford the house they want. As retirees, we are in a home much larger than what 2 people need, but it is what we want. Downsizing to a smaller home to reduce expenses and upkeep would make our everyday experiences less enjoyable.
Post: Jonathan’s Parting Thoughts: No. 7
Link to comment from September 13, 2026
That is perfect. Ironic how when it is ‘their’ money, they are not as extravagant, or wasteful.
Post: A Wedding Too Far
Link to comment from September 12, 2026
Same here. My daughter got married at the Ritz Carlton in Sarasota, on the beach. Less than 5 years later, divorced. Second marriage they eloped. No costs at all. Still married 8 years later. Fortunately we could afford it, but many cannot, and the prices are indeed outrageous.
Post: A Wedding Too Far
Link to comment from September 12, 2026
i assume you are saying the widow’s RMD will be $34,043, not that she owes that amount in taxes?
Post: Widow’s IRA Choice
Link to comment from September 12, 2026