Prudential White Paper on Maximizing Soc Sec

[d]

still waiting ...

 

[REWahoo]

Jeff, you are a new forum member with a total of three posts. You have not introduced yourself nor have you discussed subjects even remotely related to FIRE. Instead, you have apparently decided to "take on" another forum member.

I'm unsure of your motivation, and more than a little suspicious of why you feel obligated to wade into this discussion in the manner you have chosen.

On a more positive note...

This will be my last post directed to you, for the time being.

This is an excellent idea, and as a moderator I hope you follow through as promised.

 

[d]

you jump too quickly, perhaps, on Jeff; though he doesn't appear very tolerant.

 

[Nords]

you jump too quickly, perhaps, on Jeff;  though he doesn't appear very tolerant. 

Let's just say that we recognize the trend.

Be careful how you criticize the moderators-- how do you think we joined their club?

 

[jdw_fire]

looks like a rather hot subject ... not sure I want to get involved, but unless my calculations are off, it seems the annuities in the illustrations have an internal rate of return of about 4%.  In the examples given with delayed SS, would not the subjects be better to use their IRAs (invested at an assumed 5.75% net of expenses) to provide the equivalent of the annuity income?

d, is a response to this question what you are "still waiting" for?  If so I'll attempt an answerbased on my calculations of the example.  What I get for an IRR for the annuity is 5.28% instead of the 4% you get. So if the investment that produces a 5.75% net of expenses is as "guaranteed" as the annuity and you can W/D P&I without penalty to get the cashflow then that would appear to be the better choice by just under 1/2%. 

 

[d]

jdw: thnx for your response, but I was actually waiting for CFB to reply to Jeff. nonetheless, guess I'll have to recheck my math on the IRR calculation.

 

[HFWR]

I have nothing to do with the financial services industry, couldn't care less one way or the other about annuities, and don't know the author of the Prudential paper.

Here is the point:  You are a rude guy who needs to clean up his act.  I have no knowledge of your background.  But a lot of the characteristics you show on this board suggest that you lack both a good education and, especially, a good upbringing.   

This will be my last post directed to you, for the time being.

That you Howard Max? :

 

[bosco]

This will be my last post directed to you, for the time being.

"Gentlemen, this is my last press conference. You won't have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore."

after losing bid for governor of California

(except he didn't hold true to his word)

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

This will be my last post directed to you, for the time being.

That'd be very nice but really unnecessary. Your comments are the usual lightweight crap one expects from a reader of the national enquirer.

Sorry i'm late. Busy morning.

So Jeffy...in your prior analogy, i'm a little unclear on one thing.

Are you the fly or are you the garbage truck?

Very confusing.

By the way, are you related to Tony2005 by any chance?

In any case, I take the commentary very seriously, I assure you. Clearly remarks from someone I dont know or know anything about are key as I lack self approval and need confirmation from others, just like several other folks in the vicinity



It also doesnt matter if I was raised and educated by weasels and beavers. I'm a more successful person than you are, or ever will be, and I dont even need to know anything about you to assure that!

As far as the above dialog, I guess I've got a bad reputation, and like the usual hockey player with a bad rep, the crowd is expecting something and finds it even when its not there.

Certainly the second and third man into a fight are the ones most noticed.

However, in keeping with my poor educational background, may I offer a comment that I think outlines the primary issue?

"When the wise man points at the moon, the fool looks at the finger."

A lot of looking at the finger here.

Jeffy, look at this finger!

 

[brewer12345]

http://www.inflatable-kayaks-guide.com/index.html





(Boy am I glad I stayed out of this one)

 

[d]

CFB:

good shot ... was worth the wait!

 

[73ss454]

I told you guys this was going to be fun!

 

[MasterBlaster]

If you guys like this snit stuff then more to you.

I would hope that some of us could rise above it.

- To paraphase the great Rodney King - Can't we all just get along !

 

[REWahoo]

If you guys like this snit stuff then more to you.

Blaster, I agree...this thread is full of snit.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

CFB:

good shot ... was worth the wait!

Fair to middling effort. Pre coffee while I was making cornmeal flapjacks and bacon for the wife and baby and getting ready to head out and install my solar gable fan.

A reasonable level of committment for a bargain basement troll in a snitty thread thats really much ado about nutting...