Dave_In_Norfolk Posted January 26, 2012 Author Share Posted January 26, 2012 First SEP IRA max contributions are 50k this year (sorry it's my job) secondly Mitt does not only have access to top advisors but his wealth offers him access to strategies that most don't have. Thirdly assets offered to him in his IRA can be way under valued at time of contribution (which is legal) and lastly he uses magic. What does this mean? How does that work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 What does this mean? How does that work? Magic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wisconsin Bills Fan Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 So, like, all those Conservatives that yelp and bark over welfare should just STFU? "You stupid, ignorant, son-of-a-B word, dumb bastard. Jesus Christ, I've met some dumb bastards in my time, but you out do'em all!" -Gene Wilder (Silver Streak) This quote could be applied to every DIN post I have ever read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 I'm pretty handy with a screwdriver and a utility knife. I think that the system should be made more fair for me to conduct brain surgery. Start with DIN. Because, y'know...low risk... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Start with DIN. Because, y'know...low risk... No, mission impossible. How can he operate on something that isn't there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 So, like, all those Conservatives that yelp and bark over welfare should just STFU? We'll be happy to STFU about welfare the very minute we don't have to pay for it. But it'll never happen, Dave, because thanks to the glorious liberal ideology so entrenched in our country, we've gotten to the point where being offered financial incentive's for hard work and commitment to your job is evil and bad, but being offered financial incentives for being poor, out of work, and repeatedly pregnant is the compassionate thing to do. Need more money? Screw employment! Have another baby! Idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 I'm pretty handy with a screwdriver and a utility knife. I think that the system should be made more fair for me to conduct brain surgery. Again you're showing a complete lack of understanding of financial markets and the players. Your mutual fund has billions in it, is run by professionals, yet they still didn't get returns like Romney. Sounds unfair, right? But mutual fund managers are hamstrung by investment restrictions and safeguards that prevent them from taking outsized risks that hedge funds and private equity firms take. That's also why small investors aren't allowed to invest in many of these funds because they are more volatile and take on more risk, but of course produce high rewards if the investment hits. hmmm, i guess i should be thankful for the protection from all that risk...thanks so much. and who is that decides i'm not up for it? actually there are plenty of risky investments i or anyone have access to. i'm just not stupid enough to think that all risky investments are equal. some speculation isn't risky at all and some is sure folly despite what the investment bankers say. but they're all just honest folks trying to make an honest living, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 hmmm, i guess i should be thankful for the protection from all that risk...thanks so much. and who is that decides i'm not up for it? actually there are plenty of risky investments i or anyone have access to. i'm just not stupid enough to think that all risky investments are equal. some speculation isn't risky at all and some is sure folly despite what the investment bankers say. but they're all just honest folks trying to make an honest living, right? You do, by not meeting the minimum investment threshold. And its not you who is being protected, its the fund protecting themselves from you. I'm leery of some the sell side guys too, but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you don't know what an investment banker actually does. Given your level of anger and resentment toward the financial sector, wouldn't it behoove you to know something about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 hmmm, i guess i should be thankful for the protection from all that risk...thanks so much. and who is that decides i'm not up for it? actually there are plenty of risky investments i or anyone have access to. i'm just not stupid enough to think that all risky investments are equal. some speculation isn't risky at all and some is sure folly despite what the investment bankers say. but they're all just honest folks trying to make an honest living, right? Dude, just put your money into US Bonds, seems to be a good fit for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 You do, by not meeting the minimum investment threshold. And its not you who is being protected, its the fund protecting themselves from you. I'm leery of some the sell side guys too, but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you don't know what an investment banker actually does. Given your level of anger and resentment toward the financial sector, wouldn't it behoove you to know something about it? He doesn't seem to know much about anything. He thinks free market economics is a zero sum game & if one guy makes money it's at everyone else's expense. He can't & won't explain how he thinks it works nor is he open to learning how it works. The righteous indignation gives him a sense of superiority his life achievements have not & he's terrified of coming to the realization that this ridiculous political philosophy which he has used to define his personality is a sham. Were he a young guy he could just say he learned somethin and he gets it now, but at this stage of the game it would mean to admit to himself and everyone he knows that the condescending drivel he's passionately espoused for the last few decades is all bull ****. That's more crow than most men can stomach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 hmmm, i guess i should be thankful for the protection from all that risk...thanks so much. and who is that decides i'm not up for it? actually there are plenty of risky investments i or anyone have access to. i'm just not stupid enough to think that all risky investments are equal. some speculation isn't risky at all and some is sure folly despite what the investment bankers say. but they're all just honest folks trying to make an honest living, right? Let me try to put it another way that may make sense to you. Not likely, but let's give it a try. It relies on the fact that you've ever gambled, and by gambled, I mean sat at a table in a casino and put money down on a game where the decisions made by everyone at the table can affect each other's outcome. Blackjack is a perfect example. You and I sit at a table with a third person. We put up our ante and cards are dealt. Dealer shows a six. You and I are each holding 19 and the third person has two 10s. The obvious play? Everyone stays, dealer has to hit the six and, odds say, will likely bust. However we're at a $5 table, and the third person doesn't know jackschitt about gambling beyond the fact that when he has two cards that are the same, he can split them...so he takes a perfectly good 20, splits it, takes the dealers' bust card, and you and I lose. What do YOU do? You leave the table and go where you know this dolt won't follow you: to the higher stakes table. Higher stakes. Higher rewards. Smarter people. And no naive nickle-dime gamblers trying to split 10s off your wallet. If you don't like your odds, either move to a table with higher stakes and smarter gamblers or STFU. But stop blaming the reality that your ability to gamble is limited by the fact that you can only play at the $5 table with people who split 10s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Big investors favored over small? No stojan, sherlock. The game is not rigged towards the big guys, it's how the market operates. Put in a high school football team in the superbowl next week and see how they fare against Giants or Pats. Just because you opened up an eTrade account because a cute baby commercial inspired you, doesn't mean you have access to the same data, information and speed that professionals spend $ billions to obtain. And where do you think union pension funds put their money, numbskull? How do they get returns that are higher than T-bills? I wonder if they co-invest with the Bain Capital thieves? Except, of course, when the game is rigged against the big institutions. Like limits on percentage of ownership, being required to invest all incoming cash, balancing customer withdrawals (selling positions not because its a good idea, but because someone got spooked and wants their money back), rigid parameters, conflicting interests (trying to smooth out a steady S&P plus every quarter rather than just maximize cap appreciation over time), and group think. Just imagine managing a fund and trying to invest $15 billion dollars. That figure alone eliminates much of the playing field since your standard mutual fund can't exceed 5% ownership in any single company, and you need enough market cap to actually move the needle. There was a passage in One Up on Wall Street that stuck with me, where Lynch explained the challenge in trying to manage his $12 billion fund. He described how after a while, as the fund kept growing, he had basically maxed out all his existing positions, and was investing new money, not in his top 50, top 100, or even top 1,000 investment ideas, but he was picking his 4,000th favorite stock on the list, because he had to. After reading that it makes you appreciate the freedoms of picking your 10 or 20 best stocks, when you want, having the luxury of waiting until you see something you like, and doing so with a reasonable time frame in mind rather than worrying about if this pick will pay off in the next six months in time to get you your bonus. Not to say that its easy pickings for the average Joe-18-pack, but there are opportunities out there and you don't need a team of analysts, inside info and a bloomberg terminal at your desk to realize some nice gains. SEC filings are available, reasonably quick quotes, and volumes of information are waiting in any public library. I know this will be of little consolation to birddog's day trading forex arbitrage strat, but I don't think you have to be Warren Buffet to outperform your "medium risk" 401k. At least, I really hope not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 hmmm, i guess i should be thankful for the protection from all that risk...thanks so much. and who is that decides i'm not up for it? actually there are plenty of risky investments i or anyone have access to. i'm just not stupid enough to think that all risky investments are equal. some speculation isn't risky at all and some is sure folly despite what the investment bankers say. but they're all just honest folks trying to make an honest living, right? It's not just protecting you from risk. It's protecting the rest of us from your stupid ass, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 It's not just protecting you from risk. It's protecting the rest of us from your stupid ass, too. Is that why my application to MENSA is always denied? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Is that why my application to MENSA is always denied? Because you're part of the 98%. Signed, a member of the 2% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted January 28, 2012 Author Share Posted January 28, 2012 Romney crashing and burning with independents http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/romneys-negative-ratings-soaring-among-independents/2012/01/27/gIQAeVB1VQ_blog.html In November, Romney was rated somewhat or very negatively by 22 percent of independents. In December, Romney was rated somewhat or very negatively by 29 percent of independents. And in the new poll, Romney was rated somewhat or very negatively by 42 percent of independents — 20 points higher than two months ago. Also: In November, Romney was beating Obama 47-34 among those voters. Now the numbers are upside down: Obama is beating Romney 44-36. “Bain and the taxes just reinforce the sense that this person is in a different world. If you’re an independent voter not driven by partisanship, you read all the other tea leaves to decide who is going to fight your fight.” Magic. It's legal theft, pure and simple. IRAs are not for billionairs, they are for people's retirement funds, not so that some greedy, can never ever get enough of something he will never use, unscroupulous rich guy can squeeze the system for every last drop. It may not be illegal--because of lobbying dollars--but it is still wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Romney crashing and burning with independents http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/romneys-negative-ratings-soaring-among-independents/2012/01/27/gIQAeVB1VQ_blog.html It's legal theft, pure and simple. IRAs are not for billionairs, they are for people's retirement funds, not so that some greedy, can never ever get enough of something he will never use, unscroupulous rich guy can squeeze the system for every last drop. It may not be illegal--because of lobbying dollars--but it is still wrong Hardly credible. “Romney’s lack of connection with average people and Obama’s improving numbers on the economy account for the turnaround with independents,” Hart said. BTW, where did you get the information that Romney made 45 million a year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Romney crashing and burning with independents Romney took a major hit while he was in South Carolina, including independents,and if this trend were to continue he'd lose against Obama. Having said that, a major part of his horrible week, was his inability to answer effectively regarding his taxes and business experiences, it was as if he was embarrassed to speak of his own wealth, he looked evasive, he waffled around in his answers and it fit perfectly with the caricature of the corporate raider. However, this week he has found his voice, he gave great answers regarding his wealth and investments. All he has to do is continue to look sure of himself and make a ferocious defense of capitalism, as long as he does this, the only ones who will care about his wealth are the leftist lemming dipshits. It's like he said, its a battle for America's soul, do we go down the path of the entitlement nanny state or back to our more capitalistic society? He has experience to make that argument, now it's just a matter of him executing, and this week has been very encouraging. Also, my guess is that the next poll will show him doing better with those independents... Also, lets not forget that is just one poll, and Obama has been downin the mid 30's in virtually EVERY poll over the past 2 and 1/2 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Romney crashing and burning with independents http://www.washingto...VB1VQ_blog.html It's legal theft, pure and simple. IRAs are not for billionairs, they are for people's retirement funds, not so that some greedy, can never ever get enough of something he will never use, unscroupulous rich guy can squeeze the system for every last drop. It may not be illegal--because of lobbying dollars--but it is still wrong You do realize that by putting that much money in an IRA he will be hit with HUGE taxes (hey, I bet you like that) when he turns 70 1/2. From my professional perspective I have no idea why he did that. There are better ways to shelter money that does not have a 79 1/2 rule and when accessed can be taxes as LT gains as opposed to ordinary income. There has to be a reason why seeing he can afford planners better than me but then again I'm pretty damn good at what I do too. But you keep bitching about something you know nothing about. And BTW his $$ is something he'll never use. You ever hear of something called "leaving a legacy??" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 You do realize that by putting that much money in an IRA he will be hit with HUGE taxes (hey, I bet you like that) when he turns 70 1/2. From my professional perspective I have no idea why he did that. There are better ways to shelter money that does not have a 79 1/2 rule and when accessed can be taxes as LT gains as opposed to ordinary income. There has to be a reason why seeing he can afford planners better than me but then again I'm pretty damn good at what I do too. But you keep bitching about something you know nothing about. And BTW his $$ is something he'll never use. You ever hear of something called "leaving a legacy??" Any chance it could be in a Roth IRA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts