Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-02-2008, 12:31 PM   #101
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
audreyh1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rio Grande Valley
Posts: 16,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
You are 100% correct - nothing is guaranteed. My viewpoint is, since so little is guaranteed, I want to at least have some assurance that my portfolio won't drop in half. So, if other bad things happen, at least I won't have that worry on top of it.

What seems 'prudent' to some, seems like 'needless worry' to others. As I said before, find your own comfort level, but I will recommend that you run FireCalc and look at those portfolio dips (NOT just the end balance), and decide if that is really something you could be comfortable with.

-ERD50
Well, that is why the fishing guy (what was his handle?) often recommended having 2x your real needs as your retirement fund. Take your absolute bare-bones, no frills, living expenses, and double that to be your "plenty of padding" living expenses. So, I suppose that in this scenario, you could claim that this was a 2% withdrawal rate, but IMO it's more like you live at 4%, and only cut back to bare-bones when the portfolio shrinks appreciably.

I think most of us who have retired, have made sure there is plenty of padding. So perhaps this is more of a language argument than an implementation argument. The main (but crucial) difference being whether one starts out at a super low withdrawal rate, or whether one cuts back drastically only when needed.

I'm sure the fact that I've been retired since 1999, and at present my retirement portfolio is 67% higher than when I started makes me quite a bit more sanguine about the future as I've been able to "get ahead" in the timeline scenario. In other words, my portfolio being cut in half would now mean only down 16.5% from where I started. I also know that I can cut way back if necessary, but I won't do it unless is IS necessary.

Audrey
__________________

__________________
audreyh1 is online now   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 02-02-2008, 12:33 PM   #102
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
donheff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 8,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2B View Post
As it is, my actual 95% "success historically proven" budget is 50% above my minimum (but still nice) cost of living. Lots of travel is the only difference. That's easy to cut out if necessary.
Me too. Travel is a huge budget item. We can cut way back if things get bad and we already have invites to SteveR and Goonie's RVs in CFW's campground.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
I think you are missing the point. No, I'll re-phrase that - you ARE missing the point. It is not fear of an unknown future, but the reality of a known past.

FireCalc shows that a 4% withdraw rate can leave you with just 27% of your portfolio after just 15 years.
Yeah, yeah, we all know a 4% WR with inflation adjustments could cause that! But it is just a potential run on a graph. No one in their right mind would keep raising the ante in the face of a continuing decline. Lets face it, if past is not prologue, a 2% WR could go bust. Hold off ER until you have a little leeway in spending and then quit worrying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wabmester View Post
I don't think the solution to all of this angst has been mentioned yet: annuities!
Annuities get trashed pretty often around here but with all of these 2% worry warts, I don't know why. I am surprised we don't have more people converting half of their portfolio to a Vanguard inflation protected annuity. That half would give you pretty close to the 2% you would pull out of the total portfolio. Then you could safely go 4% on the other half since your basics are covered. You would have a nice standard of living and a g0od likelihood of leaving an estate. There are reasons for the Brits to require people to take annuities with retirement funds.

Wait until the market comes back up and buy one. Then you can quit worrying next time we have a correction.
__________________

__________________
Every man is, or hopes to be, an Idler. -- Samuel Johnson
donheff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 12:44 PM   #103
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
donheff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 8,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
A low cost annunity replacing some percentage of your portfolio will dampen total portfolio value swings at the expense of guaranteeing a lower terminal amount.
True in a good market, but not necessarily in a bad market. I think some of the studies indicate that partial annuitization increases the likelihood of portfolio survival if spending remains equal under both approaches.
__________________
Every man is, or hopes to be, an Idler. -- Samuel Johnson
donheff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 12:45 PM   #104
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 4,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by donheff View Post
Annuities get trashed pretty often around here but with all of these 2% worry warts, I don't know why. I am surprised we don't have more people converting half of their portfolio to a Vanguard inflation protected annuity. That half would give you pretty close to the 2% you would pull out of the total portfolio. Then you could safely go 4% on the other half since your basics are covered. You would have a nice standard of living and a g0od likelihood of leaving an estate. There are reasons for the Brits to require people to take annuities with retirement funds.

Wait until the market comes back up and buy one. Then you can quit worrying next time we have a correction.
I'm the self-proclaimed anti-annuity troll and even I would buy one if...
  • they weren't so stacked in the insurance company's favor meaning you'd have to live at least 10 years past your actuarial mortality to breakeven.
  • instead of market risk you are risking the future credit worthiness of which ever company holds your contract. They can and are sold and based on what I've seen in my life insurance it's always to a lower rated company. Also, in the event of a big market crash where do you think the insurance company is planning on getting the money to pay you?
  • current interest rates weren't too low. Wait until the Fed has "fought inflation" for a decade or so and the interest rates that annuities are based on will be cyclically higher. Of course, high rates in the annuitization assumption makes a future failure more likely.
I do think inflation protected are the way to go. I've seeing the purchasing power of my pathetically miniscule pension evaporate before I can even get it. Buying a traditional immediate annuity will look pretty lame in 20 years. Of course, I'm sure the insurance company will make sure they are protected against runaway inflation at your expense.
__________________
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane -- Marcus Aurelius
2B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 12:54 PM   #105
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 4,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by donheff View Post
True in a good market, but not necessarily in a bad market. I think some of the studies indicate that partial annuitization increases the likelihood of portfolio survival if spending remains equal under both approaches.
So will increasing your percentage of fixed income if you can live with the declining purchasing power. The "advantage" of annuities is that they consume your principle up front in exchange for a promised payout for life. The insurance company bets you (in the aggregate) don't outlive your actuarial mortality table age. If you accept depleting principle and are willing to risk that you aren't one of the 5% that makes it 10 years past your expected life span, you'll have a greater amount of retirement spending available.

Annuity salesmen have also shown that buying variable annuities result in a higher spending rate in retirement.
__________________
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane -- Marcus Aurelius
2B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 12:57 PM   #106
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by donheff View Post
No one in their right mind would keep raising the ante in the face of a continuing decline.
Fine thing to say - but do some runs in FireCalc and report back. I think you will find that cutting spending significantly does not temper the dip all that much. It helps of course, and we all would do it, but it is no silver bullet based on a few quick runs that I did.


Quote:
Annuities :

Wait until the market comes back up and buy one. Then you can quit worrying next time we have a correction.
Well, I won't say anything until I reference the FAQ: (what!!?? no Annuity FAQ? - OK, use the search function)

Yes, annuities can help address this situation. OF course, as discussed ad nauseam here, there are risks there also (issuer cannot pay). IMO, your idea is a reasonable approach, and to me it makes sense to wait until you are older, fewer years to worry about the issuer. Of course, by then it may be too late.

Where's that 'Easy Button'?

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 12:57 PM   #107
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Yes, but a little caveat is in order. Tilting the AA too far towards fixed income starts to bring lower lows too - I'd assume due to high inflation periods.

Once you decide on some other factors, you can start running FireCalc with various AA and look for a range of historically optimum ratios. 50/50 looked pretty good for my case, but it was not a huge delta from 75/25.
Don't confuse survivability (go/no-go attribute data) with variation in intermediate or terminal values (variable data). There're interelated as we're using them here, but not the same.

Yes, excessive fixed investments in your AA will result in lower survivability but will generally reduce volatility.

IMO, survivability is more important than intermediate or terminal values as actually running out of money is much, much worse than coming close to running out of money. Our discussion here has really been great as it's serving as a clarification and reminder that even a portfolio destined to survive will likely exhibit significant variability over time. We need to be prepared to mentally cope with that.

That's the point of your original post, right?
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 01:02 PM   #108
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
donheff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 8,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2B View Post
So will increasing your percentage of fixed income if you can live with the declining purchasing power. The "advantage" of annuities is that they consume your principle up front in exchange for a promised payout for life. The insurance company bets you (in the aggregate) don't outlive your actuarial mortality table age. If you accept depleting principle and are willing to risk that you aren't one of the 5% that makes it 10 years past your expected life span, you'll have a greater amount of retirement spending available.
I am talking about inflation protected annuities - no decline in purchasing power, at least up to the limit of the inflation adjustment. I suspect more of these arrangements will be offered as the boomers start looking for new products. I have a Federal pension so I already have a cushion. But if I was flying completely on my own I would consider partial annuitization (of the VG inflation protected type) rather than limit myself to 2% WR.

I don't want to hijack this thread into an annuity thread -- we have been there before. So lets go back to FireCalc runs. Here is the bat aimed at myself for going this way
__________________
Every man is, or hopes to be, an Idler. -- Samuel Johnson
donheff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 01:10 PM   #109
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Lsbcal's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: west coast, hi there!
Posts: 5,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
...If low portfolio values disturb you, use the FireCalc option to call out a minumum portfolio value defining failure. You'll need a larger portfolio to support your desired WR, but you won't have to stomach scary dips below that amount.
I wasn't aware of this option, thanks. For others I guess we are talking about the "investigate" tab and the box for Leave some money in the portfolio for my estate. Setting this to some lower value of the current portfolio will tell you how many times you hit this minimum during the cycles (not just the end values).
__________________
Lsbcal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 01:19 PM   #110
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
haha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by wabmester View Post
I don't think the solution to all of this angst has been mentioned yet: annuities!

Some people seem to have pension envy. Annuities!

The real reason we're all sticking with stocks and bonds is greed, right? We're basically betting that worst-case won't really happen to us.
Yes. And the strong desire to be sure no one is making money by selling us a product or service, no matter how helpful these might be.

"It's my money, all mine!"

Ha
__________________
"As a general rule, the more dangerous or inappropriate a conversation, the more interesting it is."-Scott Adams
haha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 01:26 PM   #111
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
Don't confuse survivability (go/no-go attribute data) with variation in intermediate or terminal values (variable data). There're interelated as we're using them here, but not the same.

Yes, excessive fixed investments in your AA will result in lower survivability but will generally reduce volatility.
Right - I was looking at lower-lows in the intermediate values - but run them yourself, I was just doing some quick checks and it will vary with pensions, etc. For my situation, the dips got lower as I move more than 50% to fixed - I think inflation and lower average returns just starts eating into the portfolio more than the market eats into equities at that point. For me, 50-50 looked like the 'sweet spot' in terms of reducing the lows of the lows (which is likely different than total volatility).

Quote:
... a clarification and reminder that even a portfolio destined to survive will likely exhibit significant variability over time. We need to be prepared to mentally cope with that.

That's the point of your original post, right?
Exactly. I had always focused on that end point, not running out. And I was actually pretty unaware of just how extreme the intermediate dips were, and how fast they could come. I know that I am pretty good at separating numbers and emotion, but a 2/3 to 3/4 dip (leaving you with just 1/3 to 1/4 of your portfolio)in 15 years hits me emotionally! No way around it, so I want to have a strategy to cope.

Since I had not been looking at it that way, I figured others were not either. So I thought it worthwhile to start the discussion. As I said in the original post, I think that showing that the portfolio could lose 73% of it's value in just 15 years, is more tangible than '95% success factor'.

At least it was to me, and I'm pretty comfortable with 'confidence factors' and 'a = .95'. I suspect those concepts are a bit more abstract to some others. But again, we are not really dealing with statistics here, we are dealing with historical data, so I trust the runs themselves more than confidence factors, standard deviations and so forth.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 01:34 PM   #112
Administrator
Gumby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,137
ERD50:

Thanks for starting this thread. It has been an illuminating discussion.
__________________
Living an analog life in the Digital Age.
Gumby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 01:52 PM   #113
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Right - I was looking at lower-lows in the intermediate values - but run them yourself, I was just doing some quick checks and it will vary with pensions, etc. For my situation, the dips got lower as I move more than 50% to fixed - I think inflation and lower average returns just starts eating into the portfolio more than the market eats into equities at that point. For me, 50-50 looked like the 'sweet spot' in terms of reducing the lows of the lows (which is likely different than total volatility).
Yeah...yeah.... I agree. But I was looking at it slightly differently. In my post I said that a highly conservative AA required a larger portfolio to achieve the same survival rate. So, I was increasing portfolio value to accomodate a high percentage of fixed, say 20/80, and maintaining the same survival rate,then looking at those outputs as variable data.
Quote:

Exactly. I had always focused on that end point, not running out. And I was actually pretty unaware of just how extreme the intermediate dips were, and how fast they could come. I know that I am pretty good at separating numbers and emotion, but a 2/3 to 3/4 dip (leaving you with just 1/3 to 1/4 of your portfolio)in 15 years hits me emotionally! No way around it, so I want to have a strategy to cope.
Aren't you one of the guys who make their own beer? I think you've mentioned that. Isn't that an easy way to cope? And it would keep you involved in your hobby.
Quote:

Since I had not been looking at it that way, I figured others were not either. So I thought it worthwhile to start the discussion.
It has been worthwhile. I've always looked at FireCalc output as a distribution of outcomes as opposed to a probability of success with success = not running out of money. I've sensed I've been nearly alone in this outlook and am delighted it's being brought up.
Quote:
But again, we are not really dealing with statistics here, we are dealing with historical data, so I trust the runs themselves more than confidence factors, standard deviations and so forth.
Describing/analyzing historical data is called "descriptive statistics." We are really dealing with statistics here....... You must have meant to say we're not dealing with probablity theory here.
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 03:11 PM   #114
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
twaddle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,378
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
I've always looked at FireCalc output as a distribution of outcomes as opposed to a probability of success with success = not running out of money.
For their next trick, I'm hoping somebody takes a look at the starting conditions for each period and discovers that the distribution of outcomes is dependent on those initial conditions.

Some variables might include dividend yield, interest rate, inflation, and P/E or P/B.....
__________________
twaddle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 03:34 PM   #115
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
Yeah...yeah.... I agree. But I was looking at it slightly differently. In my post I said that a highly conservative AA required a larger portfolio to achieve the same survival rate.
OK, but a larger portfolio isn't in the cards for me at this point, since I already retired. Unless you were thinking of making a donation to the ERD50 retirement fund... nah, I didn't think so

Quote:
Aren't you one of the guys who make their own beer? .... Isn't that an easy way to cope?
I actually made two batches this past week, 10 gallons fermenting away in the basement. Hmmm, so is my beer production inversely correlated to the market? What good are trailing indicators anyway?

Quote:
It has been worthwhile. I've always looked at FireCalc output as a distribution of outcomes as opposed to a probability of success with success = not running out of money. I've sensed I've been nearly alone in this outlook and am delighted it's being brought up.
Everyone takes a slightly different view of things. For me, I was never satisfied with the 95% rate that so many seem OK with - I figured I should aim for 100% historic success rather than an historic 5% failure. There are plenty of other variables to whack us up side the head, I didn't want this to be one of them. But yes, once I saw 100% success, I didn't think too much about the ending figure - I 'made it', the rest was for my heirs/charities to worry about. So looking at these mid-term levels was an eye-opener for me.

Quote:
Describing/analyzing historical data is called "descriptive statistics." We are really dealing with statistics here....... You must have meant to say we're not dealing with probablity theory here.
I see your point, but I think it depends. Since I'm ignoring the % success numbers, and just looking at the results and the Minimum value, that would just be basic math, right? If I start analyzing the mean, standard dev, etc - then yes, we would be in the realm of descriptive statistics. Though I guess we have thrown in some of that, too. Maybe just calculation a 'min' is enough to call it statistics - I don't know?

Time for a beer.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 10:11 PM   #116
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Maybe just calculation a 'min' is enough to call it statistics - I don't know?
Well, minimum is one half of range, a description of the disbursement of the data.
Quote:

Time for a beer.

-ERD50
Sorry, I started without you! And yes, with over a foot of snow on the ground, I did grill salmon out on the patio earlier this evening! Sometimes ya just gotta forget about failure rates, investment outcomes and retiring into recessions and have a little fun!
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 10:21 PM   #117
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
HFWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lawn chair in Texas
Posts: 12,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
And yes, with over a foot of snow on the ground, I did grill salmon out on the patio earlier this evening! Sometimes ya just gotta forget about failure rates, investment outcomes and retiring into recessions and have a little fun!
GOD BLESS
__________________
Have Funds, Will Retire

...not doing anything of true substance...
HFWR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2008, 03:49 AM   #118
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,304
Great thread. It really made me think (it hurts a bit, after being retired ... )
Random Thoughts as I read through this;
1) Firecalc should be used as one additional indicator (albeit a good one) , not as the gospel. IMO, there is a bit of religious zeal going on re: Firecalc
2) Everyone’s risk tolerance is different. Those on this forum seem to run from 1 to 10 (where 1 is very low and 10 is very high, or vice versa )
3) The risk tolerance level and what level of luxury you want to have in retirement, will determine how much of a multiple of the ‘bare necessities’ you require to comfortably retire and SLEEP AT NIGHT. For example, if you need $1000/month to cover your rent/mortgage, basic food, clothes, transportation, and insurance and taxes,
a) and if you have a very low risk tolerence and you want to travel extensively, say at a rate of $3000/month average (or substitute your favorite brand of luxury), then you may need to have a portfolio that throws off $6000/month for you to sleep at night ($2K buffer). This way if things go south on you, you can throttle back and still do some of the niceties of life AND sleep at night.
b) and if you have an average risk tolerance and the above applies, then you may want to have your portfolio throw off $5000/month ($1K buffer).
c) and if you are in a hurry to retire and are a high risk taker, then you could retire on $4000/mth ($0K buffer). This is what I think many assume is the case (ala this thread). IMO, it is not. This assumes everyone is at the same risk tolerance level (a big ASSUMPTION). Those that are category a or b pad their portfolios and yes (gasp!) delay their retirements (in some eyes)… I don’t look at it as delaying their retirements, it is called planning their retirements correctly and implementing their plans. Hence the difference in opinions and discussions on 2% vs. 4% swr
(or as I like to view it, the ‘Great Taste, … Less Filling’ argument).
These are just an example, your mileage may vary.

Everyone is right, … so take your pick of plan, and back to w*rk, you wage slaves …
__________________
Life is GREAT!
megacorp-firee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2008, 06:43 AM   #119
Administrator
W2R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 38,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gumby View Post
No doubt that you will be better off in a lower withdrawal rate scenario. Yet one other thing that using 2% versus 4% guarantees is that you will need to continue working long enough to double your starting portfolio amount. Depending on the ratio of current contributions to internal portfolio growth and overall portfolio performance, that could mean 5 - 10 years of additional work. You have to weigh these lost years of your life against the need to feel more secure.
Perhaps in your individual case, that is what it "guarantees". You really can't assume that is true for everyone, or if everyone is running Firecalc to figure out how long they should work. Some are stuck working for other reasons such as waiting for lifetime medical to kick in. Firecalc is a great planning tool, even for those with more than just barely enough $$ to retire upon and lower risk tolerance than yours.
__________________
Already we are boldly launched upon the deep; but soon we shall be lost in its unshored, harbourless immensities.

- - H. Melville, 1851
W2R is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2008, 06:45 AM   #120
Administrator
W2R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 38,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by megacorp-firee View Post
1) Firecalc should be used as one additional indicator (albeit a good one) , not as the gospel. IMO, there is a bit of religious zeal going on re: Firecalc
Amen! As a modeler (of something totally different), I think that often too much burden is put on Firecalc for any model to bear.

"All models are wrong; some models are useful" (G.E.P. Box, 1979).
__________________

__________________
Already we are boldly launched upon the deep; but soon we shall be lost in its unshored, harbourless immensities.

- - H. Melville, 1851
W2R is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
net worth


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hi, my net worth Gazingus Hi, I am... 21 01-11-2008 05:12 PM
Net Worth Benchmarks saltydog Young Dreamers 46 10-27-2006 08:11 PM
net worth spreadsheet Martha FIRE and Money 26 07-31-2005 10:09 PM
Net worth sunrunner4@hotmail.com Life after FIRE 23 08-11-2004 12:23 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:16 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.