Question for Millionaire Mommy...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I didn't mean that her advice was good, just that she's finding fame and fortune, while we're sitting in our underwear arguing on an internet forum. ;)

Damn..... did I leave my camera turned on again? :-[ Sorry. I know it's not a pretty sight.....
 
MMND, If nothing else, thanks for revving up the gang here. I think you'll agree that this is a very opinionated, vocal group of folks -- some of whom are college professors, economists, certified financial planners, other professionals -- who give as good as (or better) than they get. Don't take any of this personal and I hope you'll stick around to add your own spice to this interesting melange.

FWIW, I am female and both my father and brother are master plumbers. I've learned volumes from my fellow posters here.
 
MMND.... NOBODY that I know of that has any real training in portfolio analysis would be in equities 100%... and nobody would use a 10% rate of return for their calculations. Can you get 10%... why yes... but I would not bet my future on that kind of return...

I'm not sure what qualifies for "real training in portfolio analysis".

My retirement funds are 100% equities.

I actually don't use 10%; I use 10.7%, which is the CAGR for the SP500 from the Ibbotson study of stock returns from 1926 or so to the present.

My rule of thumb for what I use for planning purposes is the average over the longest period of time from the most authoritative source I can find. I know there are many folks, including famous smart people, projecting lower rates of return on stocks going forward; I disagree with them.

2Cor521
 
I didn't mean that her advice was good, just that she's finding fame and fortune, while we're sitting in our underwear arguing on an internet forum. ;)

Okay i'm confused now, so help me out. Which is better?

And whats this "underwear" thing you speak of?
 
Puhleease. She's stated her assumptions, and people are arguing that their assumptions are better than her assumptions.

I'll agree that since the Internet became available to all, Google and other web searches can make anyone an expert...........:D

They are all assumptions. As long as you state them up front, people can take them or leave them at face value.

As is the case with ANY poster here.........

I sincerely doubt that the "experts" here know any better than she does about the "correct" forward return rate, the "correct" allocation to stocks, or the "correct" number of mutual funds to provide diversification.

Well, if the Nobel Prize gurus could blow up LTCM, then I don't feel so bad.............;)
 
Someone please let the fat lady sing, ring the bell or bring Hitler into the conversation.
Please!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I think the Kaderli's are 100% equities again; not completely sure. They were 100% before the 2000-2002 market slump.

don't know who or what Kaderli's is... but I will look it up...

OK... I see, someone on the board... does not fit what I was saying... she is 100%, so there are people who do it.. and what I said was someone who does portfolio analysis... a slight difference maybe:confused:
 
Someone please let the fat lady sing, ring the bell or bring Hitler into the conversation.
Please!!!!!!!!!!!!

Aw, c'mon, this threadjack is just getting started. She needs to learn about that, too.
 
Someone please let the fat lady sing, ring the bell or bring Hitler into the conversation.
Please!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hitler used an 11% projected ROI.

I don't know if that's enough for Goodwin or not.
 
Hitler used an 11% projected ROI.

I don't know if that's enough for Goodwin or not.

No deal. You specifically cannot use Godwin's to intentionally end a discussion.
 
I've got my work (pun intended) cut out for me here, don't I, with 80 posts to respond to no less!
shocked.gif
Bear with me, please, as I tackle one at a time (and continuing as long as I can sit still in front of this keyboard...). And I'll try to stop the disturbing visions of us all gathered 'round the forum in our underwear. (How did you know what I was wearing??)

Isn't it possible for some areas of the country to have homes appreciate faster than rental inflation? In other words, a 63-year-old might have the value of their $300K real estate rise faster than the value of their investment portfolio, especially if rents are rising rapidly.

Yes, as we all have heard, real estate market conditions vary greatly from location to location. The blog post you are referencing was MY reply to ONE reader's question about what I thought would work better for ME in MY hometown. YMMV, of course. (Note: I don't provide advice on my blog-- I share my personal story and my personal opinions.)

We've also heard that over the long haul, home appreciation rates tend to average only slightly more (<1%) over the long-term rate of inflation. (I do have a link to this data somewhere on my blog.) As we all know here, past performance is not a guarantee of future returns, but as they say, history does tend to repeat itself.

Many "senior citizen" homeowners are exempt from or pay reduced property taxes. As far as the rest of the numbers, while I don't disagree with anecdotal evidence, I'd be interested in a study. Got any links?
Again, everyone should enter their OWN assumptions. Mine are based on where I live, my investment style, my preferences and values, my outlook towards the future, my evaluation of past history, etc. YMMV.

If you haven't already, I'd encourage you to try out the rent vs buy calculator at Financial Calculators from Dinkytown.net. Make sure you take into consideration an annual allowance for maintenance, repairs, remodeling projects, HOA, etc (personally, I budget 1.5% of the value of the home in the HOA field to cover all of these). Some other work-arounds I've tried are to enter your current home equity amount in the down payment field and your current home value in the price field.

Then there's the issues of reverse mortgages or downsizing.
Yes, but reverse mortgages come with a price, of course. Downsizing was what we picked and it has worked out well for us.

I think that many people, investors or otherwise, will feel more secure in a home they own (reverse mortgaged or not) than in a home subject to the vagaries of landlords, rising rents, and décor restrictions. There's a strong emotional component to ER decisions that has to be recognized, or an "investor" will flee at the first sign of discomfort.
Very true. This is a good example of the personal part of personal-finance. One sees the hassles of renting, while the other sees the hassles of owning. We prefer renting, for a wide variety of reasons right now. I'd be happy to share them later, if you'd like.

If you're suggesting diversification then perhaps that 10% return is a bit high. What's your recommended portfolio asset allocation and where is the returns data coming from? The reason we're asking questions like this is because, on this board particularly, that issue is subject to a lot of data mining. Even after resolving that issue there's a significant sentiment that future S&P500 returns will be more along the lines of 6-7% before taxes... which would make a diversified portfolio's returns even lower.
I addressed my specific portfolio holdings in my intro thread on this forum. I also shared my strategy on my blog (and an outdated portfolio reveal).

Re: S&P returns - I invest globally, not just in the US. It's also my personal preference to use long-term historical data as a reference than attempting to predict the future. My crystal ball doesn't seem to work, dang it!
tongue.gif


Uhm, yeah, I think you could say that for most of the experienced posters on this board. We'll raise our hands if we think things are going too fast...
Not sure how I deserved this sarcasm, but let me clarify that I know that everyone on this forum is brilliant. No question about it. Perhaps you misinterpreted my request for REWahoo's feedback to make sure I understood his/her question first b4 continuing on. I was sleepy. It was ME that was slow, not you or anyone else here.
 
And they come across as some of the nicest people I've ever "met" on the internet...

2Cor521

I'd have to totally agree with that statement and I proudly claim that I don't think less of them for it!;)
 
MMND, as someone who sold last year (non-financial reasons) and am new to renting, I agree with your agrument that renting is cheaper and more convenient in "most" areas. Yes, isolated cases can be made. But look at Rubloff.com and you will see homes for sale as well as rent. In Chicago, rent is a winner every time.

As for the attacks on you, they got pretty personal but you just need to search on some of those posters names and see that they have not singled you out for special treatment.

One has even suggested on another thread, that posters he wants to ignore should be publicly shamed by placing data about them in public view. Of course, all in the name of "helping" them reform. Hmmm, is that getting close to Goodwin's Law.

Some feel a strong need for control.

Welcome to a very nice place with people like FinanceDude, jIMOh, ERD50, HFWR, twaddle, and maybe even sgeee (most attacked poster ever.)
 
One has even suggested on another thread, that posters he wants to ignore should be publicly shamed by placing data about them in public view. Of course, all in the name of "helping" them reform.

Did I miss something?? :confused:
 
While 10% is high

the real problem is that it applies to the accumulation, not decumulation, phase.

While we revert to the historical 4% SWR, does anyone have a means of computing a SWR given an expected portfolio return and distribution? Not sure this is really possible without other assumptions such as (lack of) sequential correlation, but anything others have done on the subject would be interesting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom