Between real estate and 401K, I'm hoping to retire on a measly $1.6 million, and I will be claimimg Social Security and my UK pension.
If I ever get a serious illness I'll move back to Europe to make sure I get decent, public healthcare, that is if the UK is still in the EU by then.
Maserati wrote:
I'm flexible. I don't play the "retirement account" or "retirement planning" game to any great extent, and I have done very well (after taxes, yes) staying away from that paradigm. If I would just keep my $ in the bank and collect essentially no interest, I would already have done better upon retirement than I would have by having gone a "conventional" route.
Having said that, I'm still interested in growth. I don't micromanage things, however--I like to pick a basket of equities, and hold onto them long enough to make the capital gains long-term and until I no longer like the look of the way the market is shaping up. Last year's massive gains made me nervous--there's something wrong with 30% in one year. Either it went too high, or it was too low to start with, or both, or nobody knows what the heck they are doing, but the point is that something is wrong with things because 30% per annum, overall, is unjustifiable. Just think of the chaos when there is a 30% drop. To me the two occurrences are equivalent.
I'll wait until it feels right. Again, I'm no spring chicken, I have been around for my fair share of cycles.
The things that anchor me are that people all around the world are fundamentally greedy to some extent; also that they are, as a whole, profoundly ignorant; also that there is a great deal of corruption and it is increasing daily; also that the upcoming generations are incredibly unsophisticated, yet smart enough to be generally distrustful; also that a relatively small segment will control not only the markets but the general directions of societies; also that western values and civilization are on the wane; etc. These things all lead to one paradigm: control of the many by the few, in a very general sense in democracies, in a very direct sense elsewhere.
The best way to use the market is to list securities for public sale--THAT is the way you can make real money off the market. I'm not talking about incremental advance, I'm talking about real money. Other than that, you can scrabble around in the markets, hoping to feed of the scraps left over by the big boys.
At some point in your trajectory, fair enough, depending on who you are. I know I myself have changed in this respect, I am more inclined now to settle on some sort of index fund than I used to be. I'm not so far gone as to do bonds yet, but I could see it happening some day. Flexible, yet evolving.
I also thought that I would never seriously consider, for instance, gold, because it is antithetical to actually doing any work on property to increase value--but here I am, considering gold. Not to bury in my basement, but to buy and sell. And not mining stocks. I still remember BRE-X.
I have asked the question on this board before, how much do you need to have before you can be relatively comfortable? I have expressed the opinion that a couple of million won't do it, because it can disappear easily through devaluation and confiscation. My question was answered to some extent for England, IIRC it was 7 million pounds, or 17, or maybe USD, that you needed before you would be considered squarely in the senior league. In the US, in 2011, the figure (through survey) was 7.5 million USD.
I know what they mean. I don't have that much. If I did, I would likely feel comfortable, very comfortable. That is around the figure that I think, too, although I might lower it to $5m. Below that, you're really vulnerable in my mind. So I need to keep going.
What I read, I assimilate, I don't necessarily believe. It is still important to be aware of it, even if it is designed only as propaganda, as a ruse, or as advertising. I haven't yet been caught with my pants down--if I had to bet (and I do), I would bet (and I have) on a significant correction happening at the least, or a real crash, depending on whether there is a big enough precipitating event, like a major epidemic, an electrical grid failure, huge crop failures in the breadbasket countries, widespread drought.
If I lose my bet, I don't lose that much, because I am willing to go with the punches and get back in. For that price, I would have gained some peace of mind, which is what I now have. I still believe I made the right move, and am absolutely satisfied. For now.
For a guy who writes so much, you say nothing in particular.
You looking for something you can actually USE?
LMAO
You haven't been in this game very long, have you?
Maserati wrote:
If I would just keep my $ in the bank and collect essentially no interest, I would already have done better upon retirement than I would have by having gone a "conventional" route.
Nonsense.
agip wrote:
I couldn't live with the sort of insecurity and lack of strategy you seem comfortable with. In, out, wait, don't wait...shouldn't you have a plan? a strategy? doesn't have to be buy and hold, but something to anchor you? So you don't sway depending on what you read?
Except you claim to have a strategy(ies), but then disregard them depending on how you feel at the moment. Not really much of a difference, except Maserati isn't deluding himself or others claiming to nobly follow a plan or strategy.
Pointing Out the Obvious wrote:
Maserati wrote:If I would just keep my $ in the bank and collect essentially no interest, I would already have done better upon retirement than I would have by having gone a "conventional" route.
Nonsense.
No way to determine that until he retires.
You were labeling your own comment without even realizing it.
pot meet kettle! wrote:
Pointing Out the Obvious wrote:Nonsense.
No way to determine that until he retires.
You were labeling your own comment without even realizing it.
What is it about the words "already have done better" that you don't understand?
just a thought... wrote:
agip wrote:I couldn't live with the sort of insecurity and lack of strategy you seem comfortable with. In, out, wait, don't wait...shouldn't you have a plan? a strategy? doesn't have to be buy and hold, but something to anchor you? So you don't sway depending on what you read?
Except you claim to have a strategy(ies), but then disregard them depending on how you feel at the moment. Not really much of a difference, except Maserati isn't deluding himself or others claiming to nobly follow a plan or strategy.
not an accurate description.
I keep 13% of my portfolio in a 'fun money' account and trade that around. that money is mostly invested according to quant strategies from Jim O'Shaughnessy and Joel Greenblatt. Plus some ideas from Meb Faber. Plus a couple of other ideas like the gold trade I am admittedly being a little sloppy with. But still that 13% is managed with firm stratgies.
The rest of my portfolio is almost all in indexed ETFs and some in a fund run by jim o'shaughnessy's quant findings.
That money hasn't been, but will be, managed with the 200 day strategy as much as it makes sense in a tax perspective. I haven't been tested for a couple years, but I do hope to be disciplined enough to do some selling when the 200 day rule goes into play. but I haven't been tested yet.
Is that disregarding my strategy? I don't think so. I have a roughly 70% stock/30% bond portfolio and will have that until the market falls below the 200 day.
In the fun money account I do play a little looser .
My comparison is from the point I started investing, if I had shoved my money into standard retirement vehicles and let it sit, vs doing what I have done, and now sitting largely in cash.
While you are correct that there is no way to tell until the exact time of my "retirement", which in this instance would be statutorily defined, the markets would have to perform better between now and then than they ever have.
Which is highly unlikely, and which, when combined with the prospect of increasing interest rates, is why I made the statement.
Note that I'm responding to pot meet kettle, not to POTO.
hey Maser -
so the 1Q GDP # was low, indicating a sharp slowdown from the 4q. Many people theorized that this was because of the bad weather in the big population zones - NYC, Boston, Chicago, etc.
do you still think the weather doesn't have much net effect on the economy?
And if the 2Q # posts a jump back, will you say it was a coincidence?
fisky wrote:
I won't attempt to call the market for Monday, but here's what I'm seeing in the charts. I'm curious what others think, especially of the NASDAQ.
SP500 short term trend still up with support at today's intraday low. Longer term, the 2Apr high is looking more and more like a major trend reversal, but no signal yet.
DOW short term still up with support at today's close. A Monday trade range completely below today's close all day Monday would signal a trend reversal to test the mid-April low of 16000-ish (sorry, didn't look it up... whatever the low was a couple weeks ago. The 200 day MA, currently at 15805 and rising about 5 points a day, is probably the most important technical indicator to watch. Trading below this level for more than a couple of days would be a major reversal signal.
NASDAQ: A short term signal is pending to indicate a reversal from short term up to short term down. If market trades below 4128 all day Monday, then it's a bear signal for a test of the 11Apr low (4,000?). A close below 3965 would be a major bearish signal... breaking the 200 day Moving Average, breaking the mid-apr and early-Feb support levels, and completing a head and shoulders top... a major reversal signal.
What I think is that charts are either useless or dangerous; dangerous because you might actually believe them. If there was systematic information content in them that information would be used to squeeze out the gains you are seeking and it would have happened, on average, before you get your desired returns. Such actions, of course, would have affected the charts in the first place...
26mi235 wrote:
fisky wrote:I won't attempt to call the market for Monday, but here's what I'm seeing in the charts. I'm curious what others think, especially of the NASDAQ.
SP500 short term trend still up with support at today's intraday low. Longer term, the 2Apr high is looking more and more like a major trend reversal, but no signal yet.
DOW short term still up with support at today's close. A Monday trade range completely below today's close all day Monday would signal a trend reversal to test the mid-April low of 16000-ish (sorry, didn't look it up... whatever the low was a couple weeks ago. The 200 day MA, currently at 15805 and rising about 5 points a day, is probably the most important technical indicator to watch. Trading below this level for more than a couple of days would be a major reversal signal.
NASDAQ: A short term signal is pending to indicate a reversal from short term up to short term down. If market trades below 4128 all day Monday, then it's a bear signal for a test of the 11Apr low (4,000?). A close below 3965 would be a major bearish signal... breaking the 200 day Moving Average, breaking the mid-apr and early-Feb support levels, and completing a head and shoulders top... a major reversal signal.
What I think is that charts are either useless or dangerous; dangerous because you might actually believe them. If there was systematic information content in them that information would be used to squeeze out the gains you are seeking and it would have happened, on average, before you get your desired returns. Such actions, of course, would have affected the charts in the first place...
I posted that and I agree that believing in a chart is dangerous. Charting and technical analysis are more like clues. If I knew with any certainty what would happen, I wouldn't be sharing. /smiley
Look at the all-time chart for MXWL. That stock is so predictable it's easy to make money.
End of April results:
The Dow ended April 2014 with an all time high close, although
that index has traded higher intraday.
from the day the thread was started:
Dow: + 13.7% (including divs)
World Stocks (VT) + 15.3% (including divs)
So still a very poor sale for people who like money.
But stocks went nowhere in April - basically flat.
agip--
I would say exactly the same thing I said earlier, that there is no proof, it is a mere suggestion, a mere theory.
The validity of the theory is not proved by its number of adherents.
Nobody...NOBODY...has yet made a cogent ARGUMENT in favor of this proposition. That is what I'm saying.
Consider also, government spending and government "jobs" being considered a part of the national economy and employment picture.
"big population zones"
Take a look at the list of US cities by population, and tell me where most people live, and what the weather was like there:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population
, then make a cogent argument, using actual evidence and reasoning, regarding the entire US economy.
You cannot. It would be extremely complicated. Some team of researchers somewhere might try it, but they haven't yet, to my knowledge. Until they do, it's only so much hot air, designed to assuage nervous investors that the problems with the economy were external to the economy, rather than internal.
I held out no hope for 2014 Q1 already in 2013. The housing picture is already not great going into Q2--and to the extent that it does anything, it will be banks and big guys buying up distressed properties for cash.
Services to the wealthy have picked up, however--luxury goods, certain travel, architecture, financial, legal, and tax services, and certain real estate.
I don't usually look at things by quarter, I prefer to see what happened in the 12 months ending at a particular time and compare it to previous 12-month cycles.
Mediocre Q1 growth is announced, and the DJIA hits an all-time high. Like I said, the market has a mind of its own, and maybe that is a generally good thing.
If you're going by calendar years, then the DJIA has gone essentially nowhere in 2014:
Jan 1 16,576.66
Apr 30 16,580.84
Up 4 points.
I don't like comparisons on that basis, however some people do.
Still fiddle-faddle, as far as I'm concerned.
Hey technicals guys like Fisky, does anybody think that the dip at the end of Jan 2014 represented an actual buying opportunity? Serious question--and by "actual", I mean did any of you actually buy anything at that point?
Maserati wrote:
If you're going by calendar years, then the DJIA has gone essentially nowhere in 2014:
I believe agip is going by the K5 calendar.
I was 2% up in the first quarter. It would be nice if that could continue for the rest of the year.
agip wrote:
End of April results:
The Dow ended April 2014 with an all time high close, although
that index has traded higher intraday.
from the day the thread was started:
Dow: + 13.7% (including divs)
World Stocks (VT) + 15.3% (including divs)
So still a very poor sale for people who like money.
But stocks went nowhere in April - basically flat.
Too late to buy, to early to sell?
My results:
SP600 Small Cap: -2.04%
Gold +7.25%
Pimco Total Return (bonds): 1.73%
Stocks: +6%
I have these stocks:
AAPL
A
NFLX
LRCX
TQNT
ROST
NVR
RYL
Bad year for Netflix, great year form Triquint. Somewhat subpar year for me (average last 5 years is 30%), but I'm easily beating both the Morningstar mutual fund average and the Dow and SP500.
Once again, my best performing asset is gold. People like Flagpole can say what they want, but the gold market once again is eating their lunch. And what you see here is why you buy stocks, not mutual funds, if you want to make much money.
I should have said, those are YTD results.