Who is writing checks anymore?
What is a lot of money? My money in all accounts at Schwab, Fidelity and one bank is invested at 99+%.
Any time I need money I sell a portion of my funds.
Supposed you have a constant $20K and miss the 4%. It's only $160. That's peanuts. I opened my first account at VG 30 years ago but closed it within 2 years. I got so much more at Fidelity and now mostly at Schwab. VG was and still behind.
Mmm...I "love" political posts.
Biden had the highest inflation and the first time bonds lost so much in one year in the last 4 decades.
We are not interested in politics, just investing.
Gold may lack intrinsic value, but that doesn’t mean investors should limit themselves to 100% index funds or overly simple strategies.
Simple investing works well for most people—but not for everyone. My own risk/reward approach has been shaped in part by Warren Buffett:
Rule No. 1: Never lose money.
Rule No. 2: Never forget Rule No. 1.
Rule No. 3: Diversification is protection against ignorance.
I’ve added a fourth rule: momentum.
Buffett himself once said he wouldn’t invest in high-tech companies—yet later bought Apple, which grew to more than 45% of Berkshire Hathaway’s portfolio.
Similarly, Jean-Marie Eveillard, the legendary manager of SGIIX, allocated roughly 10% to gold-related positions for decades.
Markets present multiple opportunities each year across specific categories and sectors. A practical approach can be holding 70–80% in core positions and 20–30% in “explore” or opportunistic funds.
And while gold may not have much practical use, silver certainly does—with extensive industrial applications in electronics, solar panels, water purification, mirrors, batteries, and more.
In 2025, GLD gained over 63%, while SLV surged more than 133%.
Which raises a fair question: why did so many investors stick with SPY or VOO instead of QQQ, when the technology revolution has clearly dominated global markets for decades? If you want to follow Bogle and buy and hold just 3 funds, why bother discussing investment at all?
There are so many moving parts and individual situations to make reliable comments.
Add to it the fact that the future is unknown and you get more complications.
Single or married, when you or wife will take SS,
how much you already have in taxable, Roth IRA, TIRA
What state you live in which affects state tax
Until what age are you going to live. Example: if you 65 and have $500K in TIRA conversation up to IRMMA makes sense. If you have 1-2 millions, converting to 22% brackets make sense too based on... your individual situations. The whole thing of SS, converting, LTC, depends on individual situations and predicting the future. I made lots of calculations. Then I met a CPA and he verified that we should convert about $250-280K annually, otherwise we will pay a lot more in the next 20 years. If we live 25-30 years and one of us is gone, taxes will be worse. Our portfolio will be similar or bigger in 20 years with min taxes.
The funny thing about inflation is the fact that most economists predictions have been wrong for decades and we should disregard them, including the ones who got a Nobel prize, and especially the ones with political views.
In Nov 2016 Paul Krugman predictions were ridiculous https://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/krugman-trump-global-recession-2016-231055 Earlier this year hundreds of economists and articles were published that tariff will bring high inflation, 10-11 months later the inflation is still under 3%. Never in my life I based my investment or anything else on economists.
I have a friend, a prof of economics and accounting. He admitted that economists predictions are worse than meteorologists.
Powell and the Fed lost their dignity when we had the highest inflation in 4 decades while they claimed it's transitory.
Easy answer.
Our politicians have been bought by companies dealing with money, think insurance, banks, Wall St....and the healthcare companies, think pharma, PBM.
I bet that most of these early retirees have a nice pension, probably from the a Gov/state/university. For the rest of the population only savings can provide that and why they must work many more years.
I often hear the claim that you must work extremely hard to get ahead. Maybe that’s true for some people, but I’ve always believed in choosing a career you enjoy, analyzing which paths pay well, specializing, and working smart rather than simply working more.
As a teenager, my favorite job, the best-paying one for my skills, was delivering flowers. I earned about $50 per hour while working only around 6 hours per week (4 on weekends and 2 during the week). That job alone paid for my college education.
I graduated with two majors, computer science and economics/finance from a top university, completing both in just three years.
After graduation, I worked in IT until I retired. My wife and I agreed early on that we wouldn’t work more than 42–43 hours per week unless there was a genuine emergency. For the same reason, we decided not to own a business. We wanted a healthy work–life balance and to be fully involved in our kids’ school life and activities.
We immigrated to this country with just $5,000 when I was in my mid-30s. I never received stock options or profit-sharing, and my salary was average for an IT developer working in mainframe, not in Silicon Valley where they paid much more. I only received two bonuses, each around $2,000. We began saving through a 401(k) when I was 38.
From 01/2000 to 01/2010, the S&P 500 lost money, but I earned over 9.5% annually during that same period.
Thanks to disciplined investing and living within our means, I retired at age 61, just 23 years after starting my career. BTW, since I started retirement, I more than doubled our portfolio using only bond funds.
I give the same advice to anyone who’s interested. For example, a friend of my kids loves cars, so I suggested he specialize in Mercedes and work at a Mercedes dealership, not Toyota, Honda, or GM, because that’s where the higher pay and specialization opportunities are.
Most investors don’t calculate how much their Social Security (SS) benefits could grow if they invested them instead of relying on them as income. Since my portfolio is more than sufficient to cover my needs, I choose to use my SS benefits rather than sell from my investments. This approach allows my portfolio to continue growing while still providing the same amount of income I would have received from SS.
In my case, I assumed an 8% annual return on my investments until death. Since retirement, I’ve actually achieved over 11% annually by focusing exclusively on bond funds.
I started taking my SS at age 65, which has worked well for my strategy. Let's see what will happen to...
1) Taking the money at age 65. $1000 at 8% after 5 years = $73K
In the next 20 years, from age 70 to 90, starting with $73K and adding $1K monthly, it will be $909K 2) Wait 5 years. SS = $1400 (40% more).
In the next 20 years, starting with zero and adding $1400 at 8% annually will be just $797K I'm sure someone will say, "How can you be sure to make 8%?"
Because I can. I made more in 2022 too. Let's assume just 5% annually from age 65 forever.
I will have $67.8K after 5 years
The next 20 years = $585.7 If I start at age 70 with $1400. After 20 years = $568K. Conclusion: if you have enough and your SS is invested, taking it at age 65 makes sense.
Comments
Who is writing checks anymore? What is a lot of money? My money in all accounts at Schwab, Fidelity and one bank is invested at 99+%. Any time I need money I sell a portion of my funds. Supposed you have a constant $20K and miss the 4%. It's only $160. That's peanuts. I opened my first account at VG 30 years ago but closed it within 2 years. I got so much more at Fidelity and now mostly at Schwab. VG was and still behind.
Post: Schwab or Vanguard?
Link to comment from January 18, 2026
Mmm...I "love" political posts. Biden had the highest inflation and the first time bonds lost so much in one year in the last 4 decades. We are not interested in politics, just investing.
Post: China Market Risk
Link to comment from January 18, 2026
SLV continues to shine.
Post: Gold Isn’t Special
Link to comment from January 13, 2026
Gold may lack intrinsic value, but that doesn’t mean investors should limit themselves to 100% index funds or overly simple strategies. Simple investing works well for most people—but not for everyone. My own risk/reward approach has been shaped in part by Warren Buffett:
- Rule No. 1: Never lose money.
- Rule No. 2: Never forget Rule No. 1.
- Rule No. 3: Diversification is protection against ignorance.
I’ve added a fourth rule: momentum. Buffett himself once said he wouldn’t invest in high-tech companies—yet later bought Apple, which grew to more than 45% of Berkshire Hathaway’s portfolio. Similarly, Jean-Marie Eveillard, the legendary manager of SGIIX, allocated roughly 10% to gold-related positions for decades. Markets present multiple opportunities each year across specific categories and sectors. A practical approach can be holding 70–80% in core positions and 20–30% in “explore” or opportunistic funds. And while gold may not have much practical use, silver certainly does—with extensive industrial applications in electronics, solar panels, water purification, mirrors, batteries, and more. In 2025, GLD gained over 63%, while SLV surged more than 133%. Which raises a fair question: why did so many investors stick with SPY or VOO instead of QQQ, when the technology revolution has clearly dominated global markets for decades? If you want to follow Bogle and buy and hold just 3 funds, why bother discussing investment at all?Post: Gold Isn’t Special
Link to comment from January 11, 2026
There are so many moving parts and individual situations to make reliable comments. Add to it the fact that the future is unknown and you get more complications. Single or married, when you or wife will take SS, how much you already have in taxable, Roth IRA, TIRA What state you live in which affects state tax Until what age are you going to live. Example: if you 65 and have $500K in TIRA conversation up to IRMMA makes sense. If you have 1-2 millions, converting to 22% brackets make sense too based on... your individual situations. The whole thing of SS, converting, LTC, depends on individual situations and predicting the future. I made lots of calculations. Then I met a CPA and he verified that we should convert about $250-280K annually, otherwise we will pay a lot more in the next 20 years. If we live 25-30 years and one of us is gone, taxes will be worse. Our portfolio will be similar or bigger in 20 years with min taxes.
Post: Calculating the Maximum Income While Staying in the 12% Tax Bracket
Link to comment from December 13, 2025
The funny thing about inflation is the fact that most economists predictions have been wrong for decades and we should disregard them, including the ones who got a Nobel prize, and especially the ones with political views. In Nov 2016 Paul Krugman predictions were ridiculous https://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/krugman-trump-global-recession-2016-231055 Earlier this year hundreds of economists and articles were published that tariff will bring high inflation, 10-11 months later the inflation is still under 3%. Never in my life I based my investment or anything else on economists. I have a friend, a prof of economics and accounting. He admitted that economists predictions are worse than meteorologists. Powell and the Fed lost their dignity when we had the highest inflation in 4 decades while they claimed it's transitory.
Post: Interest Rates Battle
Link to comment from December 13, 2025
Easy answer. Our politicians have been bought by companies dealing with money, think insurance, banks, Wall St....and the healthcare companies, think pharma, PBM.
Post: An Uncomfortable Retail Truth
Link to comment from December 11, 2025
I bet that most of these early retirees have a nice pension, probably from the a Gov/state/university. For the rest of the population only savings can provide that and why they must work many more years.
Post: Enough Already
Link to comment from December 11, 2025
I often hear the claim that you must work extremely hard to get ahead. Maybe that’s true for some people, but I’ve always believed in choosing a career you enjoy, analyzing which paths pay well, specializing, and working smart rather than simply working more. As a teenager, my favorite job, the best-paying one for my skills, was delivering flowers. I earned about $50 per hour while working only around 6 hours per week (4 on weekends and 2 during the week). That job alone paid for my college education. I graduated with two majors, computer science and economics/finance from a top university, completing both in just three years. After graduation, I worked in IT until I retired. My wife and I agreed early on that we wouldn’t work more than 42–43 hours per week unless there was a genuine emergency. For the same reason, we decided not to own a business. We wanted a healthy work–life balance and to be fully involved in our kids’ school life and activities. We immigrated to this country with just $5,000 when I was in my mid-30s. I never received stock options or profit-sharing, and my salary was average for an IT developer working in mainframe, not in Silicon Valley where they paid much more. I only received two bonuses, each around $2,000. We began saving through a 401(k) when I was 38. From 01/2000 to 01/2010, the S&P 500 lost money, but I earned over 9.5% annually during that same period. Thanks to disciplined investing and living within our means, I retired at age 61, just 23 years after starting my career. BTW, since I started retirement, I more than doubled our portfolio using only bond funds. I give the same advice to anyone who’s interested. For example, a friend of my kids loves cars, so I suggested he specialize in Mercedes and work at a Mercedes dealership, not Toyota, Honda, or GM, because that’s where the higher pay and specialization opportunities are.
Post: Something fishy about financial security
Link to comment from November 16, 2025
Most investors don’t calculate how much their Social Security (SS) benefits could grow if they invested them instead of relying on them as income. Since my portfolio is more than sufficient to cover my needs, I choose to use my SS benefits rather than sell from my investments. This approach allows my portfolio to continue growing while still providing the same amount of income I would have received from SS. In my case, I assumed an 8% annual return on my investments until death. Since retirement, I’ve actually achieved over 11% annually by focusing exclusively on bond funds. I started taking my SS at age 65, which has worked well for my strategy. Let's see what will happen to... 1) Taking the money at age 65. $1000 at 8% after 5 years = $73K In the next 20 years, from age 70 to 90, starting with $73K and adding $1K monthly, it will be $909K 2) Wait 5 years. SS = $1400 (40% more). In the next 20 years, starting with zero and adding $1400 at 8% annually will be just $797K I'm sure someone will say, "How can you be sure to make 8%?" Because I can. I made more in 2022 too. Let's assume just 5% annually from age 65 forever. I will have $67.8K after 5 years The next 20 years = $585.7 If I start at age 70 with $1400. After 20 years = $568K. Conclusion: if you have enough and your SS is invested, taking it at age 65 makes sense.
Post: THE REAL RETURN ON DELAYING SOCIAL SECURITY
Link to comment from November 15, 2025