Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-12-2009, 03:08 PM   #81
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis View Post
all I can say is what has worked for me over the past 10+ yrs now

being in Bonds ave 8.4% apy M* Says my port has done..and a 4.2% ave yld
But, then again, That is going to be taxable come time to take it out

.
Dennis, could you share your portfolio? Trying to figure out how to not to be in the same position when the next r*ccession comes along.

Thanks.
__________________

__________________
Life is GREAT!
megacorp-firee is offline   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 10-12-2009, 06:22 PM   #82
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by rayvt View Post
I don't know about others, but my refi triggerpoint is if the payment savings for a new 30yrFRM is $100/mo or more. No cashout, just refinance the current balance. (Or you could go by interest savings, which triggers at a slightly higher new rate.)

For a 300K balance and 6% current rate, that would be a new rate of 5.375%. (For int sav: 5.5%)
For a 100K balance and 6% current rate, that would be a new rate of 4
.375% (For int sav: 4.750%)
For a 50K balance and 6% current rate, that would be a new rate of 2
.5% (For int sav: 3.5%)

So the lower the remaining balance, the greater the rate difference would have to be.
your thinking appears to be inconsistant. if you really think that keeping a mortgage is the right thing to do financially then why wouldn't maintaining the largest mortgage possible be even better? but instead of trying to do that your plan actually makes refinancing less likely as the balance goes down and you will never pull money out so you are guaranteed to eventually pay off your mortgage, even though you say keeping a mortgage is the right thing to do.
__________________

__________________
jdw_fire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2009, 06:44 PM   #83
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by rayvt View Post
Everything I've ever read w/r/t investments says that "this time it's different" are the 4 most dangerous words every uttered.
so something like the last 10 years (dot com bubble bursting, massive rise in home values, trillions of questionable loans made, massive loan defaults, forclosures, huge drop in housing values [while the average american is drowning in debt] AND a second stock market crash) has happened before?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rayvt View Post
As long as human nature remains as it is, it is never different this time.
after the great depression, human nature in the US changed and marked a generation for life. there are indications that human nature has again changed (savings rate is way up now)
__________________
jdw_fire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2009, 06:55 PM   #84
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by rayvt View Post
That's an annual difference of $6200.
If you use an SWR of 4.5%, the difference is $4950. But!!! Now the net income (after mortgage payments) is $40,040. That's essentially the same as $40k
actually if you use a 4.5% WR then the difference is 1,250,000*4.5% - 1,000,000*4.5% = 250,000*4.5% = 11,250, not 4,950

Quote:
Originally Posted by rayvt View Post
If your portfolio is a bit bigger--$1.5M--, the 4%SWR difference is still $6200, but now the net income is $42,800. Bigger than $40K.

So, from one aspect, it all depends on your viewpoint. Is $40K what you think you need?
Do you want to use a really low SWR? Or are you comfortable with a slightly higher SWR? Why did you pick 4%? Why not 3.9%? Or 3.5%?
Are you focussed on the absolute dollar delta?
If your need is less than $33,800, then there is no need to reach for $40K. It's overkill. How much do you want the rubble to bounce?

De gustibus non disputum.
not understanding what point your making. sure, if you have a larger portfolio and you use the same WR the amout withdrawn goes up, so what? how does what you wrote address the question you quoted?
__________________
jdw_fire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2009, 07:03 PM   #85
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 716
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdw_fire View Post
your thinking appears to be inconsistant. if you really think that keeping a mortgage is the right thing to do financially then why wouldn't maintaining the largest mortgage possible be even better? but instead of trying to do that your plan actually makes refinancing less likely as the balance goes down and you will never pull money out so you are guaranteed to eventually pay off your mortgage, even though you say keeping a mortgage is the right thing to do.
A cash-out refi costs significantly more than a straight rate-and-terms refi. And in many cases, the amount you can pull out is small. Case in point: we've refinanced our current house 3 times in 4 years.

Anyway, my post was in response to "Does this mean, for those that advocate not paying off the mortgage, you will refinance indefinitely as your mortgages get close to being paid off? Just wondering how far you would take this." and not a full debate on the size of your mortgage. That's another topic.
__________________
rayvt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2009, 07:20 PM   #86
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 716
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdw_fire View Post
so something like the last 10 years (dot com bubble bursting, massive rise in home values, trillions of questionable loans made, massive loan defaults, forclosures, huge drop in housing values [while the average american is drowning in debt] AND a second stock market crash) has happened before?
Correct. This has all happened before. Not the exact details, of course, but the essentials.



Quote:
after the great depression, human nature in the US changed and marked a generation for life. there are indications that human nature has again changed (savings rate is way up now)
Sorry, that's not "human nature"; that's just changes in behavior details.

Human nature is not trivialities like "savings rate".
Human nature is the concept that there are a set of characteristics, including ways of thinking, feeling and acting, that all 'normal' human beings have in common.

Human nature is why people of today can understand and appreciate the writings and plays of Shakespeare, Homer, Plato, Sun Tzu, etc. We completely understand how the people in those plays & stories are thinking and why they are behaving as they are.

The Soviet Union and the Israel kibbutzim assumed the notion that human nature is malleable. They both foundered because, in fact, human nature is fixed.

The basic components of "fear and greed" explain why there have been, and always will be, booms and busts.
__________________
rayvt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2009, 10:39 PM   #87
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Finance Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katsmeow View Post
I've read many of the threads on this but felt one part doesn't really get discussed much. So perhaps I am missing something. Let's say you have 1.25 million in cash but have a mortgage of $250k paying $1350 a month on it. Your SWR is 4% which is $50,000 a year but you spend $16200 for the mortgage so you have $33800 to spend each year other than the mortgage (plus SS, any pension).

But you then pay the mortgage leaving $1 million. At a 4% SWR you then have $40000 to spend each year. Isn't that an argument in favor of paying the mortgage ...at least for those for whom the difference between $33800 and 40000 would be meaningful?
You're forgetting that once the mortgage is paid off in the first scenario, you'll have $50k/year to spend....so I see it like this...

You can have $33,800 for x years and then $50,000 all years after that

or....

You can have $40,000 for every year

The correct choice financially would take a more complex analysis...just wanted to point out where your argument misses a key point.
__________________
Finance Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2009, 11:14 PM   #88
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Katsmeow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finance Dave View Post
You're forgetting that once the mortgage is paid off in the first scenario, you'll have $50k/year to spend....so I see it like this...

You can have $33,800 for x years and then $50,000 all years after that

or....

You can have $40,000 for every year
I'm not forgetting but didn't find it entirely relevant. That is, let's say someone is 55 and takes out a 30 year mortgage as described. It is indeed true that 30 years later the mortgage is paid off you know have $50,000 a year. But, by then you may be dead or, optimistically, still alive but most likely won't get as much enjoyment or use out of $50,000 a year then as from $40,000 a year instead of $33,800 a year from 55 to 85.

I guess the point to me is that if someone has the cash flow to easily meet all expenses and desired spending and still have a mortgage at a low rate, then I can understand that. However, it does seem that for those with less cash flow there could be more spending power by paying off the mortgage than by keeping it. I could see the difference between $33,800 a year and $40,000 a year being the difference between meeting basic expenses and having a few thousand more a year for discretionary spending.
__________________
Katsmeow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2009, 11:26 PM   #89
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Finance Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katsmeow View Post
I'm not forgetting but didn't find it entirely relevant. That is, let's say someone is 55 and takes out a 30 year mortgage as described. It is indeed true that 30 years later the mortgage is paid off you know have $50,000 a year. But, by then you may be dead or, optimistically, still alive but most likely won't get as much enjoyment or use out of $50,000 a year then as from $40,000 a year instead of $33,800 a year from 55 to 85.

I guess the point to me is that if someone has the cash flow to easily meet all expenses and desired spending and still have a mortgage at a low rate, then I can understand that. However, it does seem that for those with less cash flow there could be more spending power by paying off the mortgage than by keeping it. I could see the difference between $33,800 a year and $40,000 a year being the difference between meeting basic expenses and having a few thousand more a year for discretionary spending.
Well now you're forgetting the difference between leaving an asset to your heirs versus not.
__________________
Finance Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2009, 01:22 AM   #90
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finance Dave View Post
Well now you're forgetting the difference between leaving an asset to your heirs versus not.
how so? seems to me the "asset" gets left to heirs either way.
__________________
jdw_fire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2009, 09:00 AM   #91
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 716
My heirs have been told to not expect to inherit any assets other than a BMW sports car that's wrapped around a tree.
__________________

__________________
rayvt is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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
Prime Money Market Fund vs. Total Bond Fund two4theroad FIRE and Money 2 04-10-2008 01:46 PM
(FAQ archive) Should I pay off the mortgage or invest the money? Nords Early Retirement FAQs 0 10-15-2007 04:05 PM
Put more into 401k, fund Roth for spouse, or pay down piggyback mortgage?? CompoundInterestFan FIRE and Money 23 09-11-2007 11:26 PM
Bond Fund and Money Market Fund Tax Treatment Question terminator FIRE and Money 4 03-01-2007 07:56 AM
Question about using fund to pay mortgage Tadpole FIRE and Money 4 11-07-2004 06:58 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:22 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.