Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Mainboard' started by Joe Louis, Jul 12, 2010.
luckily i'm 99% stocks
bonds are for olds
sounds like a guy that's working in the right job for him - that's how you want a hedge fund manager thinking. I'm not saying he's wrong at all but that's the kind of thought you want from a guy in the business of hedging.
I like what he had to say, I'm not a bond guy either. Most of my wealth is in real estate, for stocks I'm heavy in tech and banks. Not a crypto fan but then again I'm usually late to every party, didn't get into stocks until Nov 2019 which was a few months before the crash. I obviously benefited greatly from the timing as I was slowly legging in at that time then was able to put a bulk of the deposits in Mar/Apr after the crash.
My 401k is 100% VTSAX
My taxable brokerage is Schwab's ETF equivalent
My HSA is VOO
My Roth IRA is a Schwab dividend yield ETF
So I'm like 100% stock but with index funds. Should I look at getting out of those?
I wouldn’t but I don’t know anything
I feel like I know just enough to be dangerous. I don't have the stomach for individual stocks so I'm in index funds. But reading that suggested at least specific sectors so I'm just curious.
It’s a risk reward play. The more concentrated you are, the greater the chance for bigger gains. Or bigger losses. Nothing wrong with what you’re doing now. Also nothing wrong with moving a little money around to mirror some of what was mentioned in that write up.
Depends on your time horizon
hopefully over our lifetimes real estate becomes a much worse investment than it was over our parents lifetimes
I'm 38. This is all retirement related.
if you're retiring at 65 i wouldn't touch a thing
Agreed Seavie unless you think you’ll panic and sell everything if it drops 30-50%. Then go ahead and buy enough bonds to help you sleep at night during a downturn.
With that time horizon you can ride out any recession.
Diversify into some meme stonks
I'll throw any leftover cash into those but I'm never going to bet the farm.
Anyone who has all that in place by 38 shouldn’t have 65 as their retirement age. I’d hope you could be done at least a decade earlier.
Now of course I’m not really interested in being rich, just being done. I’m a few years younger and trying to be “retired” in my early 40’s.
Are you underestimating the amount you need to retire at 55? Or early 40’s?
i don't really understand how you'd know this just by what investment vehicles he has and not actual $ amounts
I, too, was confused by that.
Both the vehicles and securities he chose lead me to believe he has his shit together
I definitely like most of your choices, Seavie. One issue I have with individual stocks is having to constantly babysit the account to make sure none of the companies I'm invested in are heading in the wrong direction. That's not an issue when you have the VOO and other ETFs.
Thanks. This answers my question.
I just got started this year. Well... I've had my 401k but had no idea what I was doing and wasn't contributing much. The brokerage account, HSA, and Roth IRA were all started this year. I wish I would have understood all this 10 years ago. But better late than never.
I’m on vacation in California and I just checked my stonks for the first time and realize that the trading day is almost over.
I’d have to reorganize my entire portfolio if I lived on this coast.
Even though I was working from home, I was up at 6AM every morning during the pandemic to bet on shit stocks.
"The third factor is the speed of wage increases in certain lower-paid service industries as companies like Amazon.com Inc., Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc., and Costco Wholesale Corp. engage in an arms race to staff warehouses, restaurants and big box stores. While it won't affect luxury apartments in New York or San Francisco, the higher wages will empower landlords to raise rents, particularly in metro areas that are housing-constrained."
What an amazing paragraph. "Well shit, Chipotle is paying $15/hr now, guess that 2br/1ba I have that was last updated in 2006 should go for $2200/mo instead of $1800/mo." -out of touch shitlord
I mean the specific examples he used are dumb but as a broad brush wages are going up. I find 1 & specifically 2 as more compelling arguments.
What did everyone think was going to happen as we have just been printing trillions of dollars these past 12 months? Of course prices are going up everywhere.
I think in certain circles this is considered a “classic right wing narrative”
quick someone post a M1 chart and let's get cooking
maybe even make a chart where it's correlated with something
inflation is really 30%, stay woke
housing being seen and treated as an investment vehicle is one of the singularly most toxic and destructive broadly held beliefs in this country
It definitely got more problematic when allowing foreign investment and large companies to own and rent them out.
Also I regret selling shares of FAT back in March. It seems to have taken off over the last month.
because it creates financial incentives to the land owning class which also has out sized political power to use the many many veto points we have and create more of regularly in the housing development process to prioritize property value growth above all else largely to the detriment of...75% of the population? all largely as a by product of historical segregationist policies initially but continues generations forward as "race blind"
property values only go up and fast, while we've spent multiple generations suppressing wage growth is a bad combo for quality of life for most people.
guillotine the nimbys first
What incentives are you suggesting it creates?
somebody's not an equity millionaire
Housing as an investment literally created the middle class. We all get that the last 25 years has been a bit different, but it ain’t housings fault.
ETA: said as someone, like many others, whose parents life plan was more or less destroyed in 2008.
In what was probably the largest redistribution of wealth ever given to those who were already wealthy, with the middle class feeling the brunt of the damage. They got bailed out because we are too beholden to the wealthy as a democracy, and it gave them the opportunity to keep buying while others were getting foreclosed on. Some terrible shit.
creating artificial scarcity to prop up housing prices at the cost of making it inaccessible and burdensome to those who fall below the land owning class while also moving the line for that access higher and higher. you see it constantly across the country with insane parking requirements to prevent increases in density and supply, zoning and height restrictions for the same reason, it's all about keeping capacity tight to ensure your investment goes up.
you're creating a kind of circular argument, because housing prices went up and it created wealth for the land owning class it was good, this doesn't negate the destructive power of what led to it and how the destructive capacity has expanded to encompass a higher share of the country over time. the GI bill which prompted most of the middle class expansion was a redistributive mechanism that due to the racial barriers to using it helped set the table for the "race blind" mechanisms enacted after the CRA/VRA we see today by making even more entrenched the hierarchy in this country.
all while it turned the upper class real estate investors into oligarchs and has created incentives for another tier of landlords below them
housing should be seen as a depreciating asset that lags inflation in a best case scenario, similar to a car.
I have no idea what you just said. Home and land ownership have created very important wealth for generations of middle class Americans.
Home ownership “should be seen” as a depreciating asset is a fantasy untethered from reality. Land is supply constrained. Population is growing. Urban areas are densifying. Econ 101.
because of very bad and destructive reasons to most americans and the number harmed by them has only increased at greater rates, i'm not denying that there has been benefits to many americans from this system, I just don't find the net remotely close to positive
if "econ 101" was the dynamic in this country around both approval of construction, upzoning, development and construction costs, etc the dynamic would be much closer to my ideal than the current one. dont get me started on the horrific ramifications of all the pro car subsidies we have, but that's somewhat secondary to the nimby takeover destruction we're discussing.
Tell this to all the Millennials being assfucking by companies like blackrock. Who BTW are destroying the housing market. Many Millennials are being turned into a permanent renter class because they can't afford housing.
Ok. Just understand that your reasoning flies over the head of 95%+ of Americans whose only hope at creating any type of wealth is through home ownership. Perception is reality.
Yea I got that. Again. It’s not the concept of housing and land ownership that is causing Blackrock and other PE to buy up these huge portfolios.
ok? i'm confused what you're trying to say or if you just don't understand, yes most americans thinking home ownership is a key to wealth accumulation is a thing and its also very bad. i'm not trying to convince 95%+ of people to not buy houses or something (~65% or so are only in the world of having access to start with). I wish people understood how destructive this dynamic has been for like 900 different reasons as YIMBY's have gotten some juice in the last decade and I hope that continues.
“Yes home ownership has created lots of wealth for lots of (average) people, and yes even more people than can buy homes believe this to be true and it’s actually there only means of wealth creation. However, they are all wrong to believe that because in fact, it’s all bad.”
You don’t see the issue with that statement when said on proverbial Main Street and not in some TedX forum?
i don't know why we're treating this discussion like i'm trying to win a city council seat vs just discussing the issues at play
but also yes (even with your all or nothing framing)? theres lots of broadly held beliefs in this country that are bad and people shouldn't have them