|
SlightlyMadman posted:Depends how much you make. The rule of thumb is that by the time you hit thirty, your retirement fund should be about equal to your pre-tax salary. Don't disagree, but where did you read about this?
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 04:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
Abel Wingnut posted:Question regarding credit cards and how they affect your credit score. The $200 payment will be applied entirely towards period A's balance. The question gets more complicated if you pay less than "in full" during that "grace period" (that is, the period between the statement printing and the payment being due). Are you buying a house in the next 3 months? If not, don't worry about the FICO stuff. This thread title used to be "Your credit score is not a video game". Credit scores are a complicated, mysterious thing that doesn't always make sense. Because the formulas are proprietary and secret, there's not a huge amount of information out there on how to successfully game it. For a longer answer, it *could* show your utilization as artificially low (but not zero) if you are paying off your card each month in full on the day after the statement runs. As long as you're not being a dummy and missing payments or carrying an interest bearing balance, it's totally fine to "float" the balance month to month.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 04:53
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:The $200 payment will be applied entirely towards period A's balance. The question gets more complicated if you pay less than "in full" during that "grace period" (that is, the period between the statement printing and the payment being due). Thanks. And yea, I'm probably not buying a house or car in the next ten years. I honestly want to up my credit score to apply for some better rewards cards, specifically for travel a la Frugal Travel Guy. Currently, per Credit Karma, it's at 699. Would like to get it up to 750+ and I'm sure that'll come close to happening once I get my utilization further down from the 50% it's at now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 05:03
|
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:Is $100,000 really necessary in retirement by the time you're 30? Most boomers don't even have that much saved up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 13:30
|
|
|
kansas posted:Don't disagree, but where did you read about this? https://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-20/the-financial-planning-flowchart This only suggests .5x of your income at age 30. I'm at 1.2x  Abel Wingnut posted:Thanks. Credit Karma is full of poo poo. They have me at about 730, and on my last credit report (I just refinanced my house) I was in the low 800's on the actual FICO score. You'd probably be better served paying for an actual credit score than using Credit Karma to guess. Nocheez fucked around with this message at 15:01 on Aug 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 14:55
|
|
|
Nocheez posted:https://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-20/the-financial-planning-flowchart My bad, it's 35 not 30, assuming you're targeting retirement at age 67. I forgot that I subtracted 5 from all those for my goals, since I'm shooting for retirement at 62. edit: actually looking at that chart I think it might just be a more conservative retirement approach, since it only aims for 7x at retirement, when 8x is the number I more frequently hear. But yeah, I guess the bottom line is that .5x at 30 and 1x at 35 is still on-track by many estimates. SlightlyMadman fucked around with this message at 15:15 on Aug 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 15:12
|
|
|
Hi goons in this thread! I made a post in the long term investing thread and it got to be a little more than the scope there and fits better here. So I'll link those posts and reply to the last one here just to continue the discussion if that's all right. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=2892928&pagenumber=151#post418928394 That's essentially what I have in assets, including another ~$25k in a 401k and IRA The next 5 posts revolve around that. And from the last post I'll quote here: J4Gently posted:First off congrats for being fiscally responsible, and saving for the future. Thanks, it's a point of pride that I have the discipline to not get caught up in spending just because everyone else is and being able to say no to all the shiny things I want that have no practical purpose. A coworker and I were discussing things the other day and she said "Well you could be hit by a bus tomorrow and all that saving would be for nothing!" to which I replied "I could also not be hit by a bus for 80 years and be forced to eat cat food when I'm 60." which didn't quite register... I should have been a bit clearer, it's $5k in checking for immediate needs (isn't it like >50% of people couldn't come up with 2500 in an emergency?) and $13k in savings. The $10k in i-bonds, and 3k in CD's are also savings, but just less liquid, but if it came to needing it, by the time I exhausted my liquid savings, I would be able to start converting the bonds and CD's to cash (even with a withdrawl penalty the overall interest rate would still be almost 2x what I'm getting from liquid savings. So really it's $33k in relatively easy to access accounts. And the ~$14k in brokerage which the details of are in the linked post. As far as talking to my company about the 401k I could, but I'm sure it would be a wasted effort. The person in charge of it is HR and the company accountant and the #2 man in the company. He thinks he knows everything. But... after I started contributing he was telling me oh it may not be worth it, I may not be able to keep it in there because the rest of the executives have such high salaries that they're not eligible to contribute to any plans and the average of the executive office salaries makes me ineligible too for some reason he couldn't be specific about. (and that's true, they're all $150k+/yr, but I'm only making $40k). Not to mention while he doesn't know poo poo about my job, he's always trying to tell me how to do it. They really only offer it so they can say they offer benefits in want ads, but it's the cheapest least costly plan for the company to administer. Uphill mud-slogged battle much? So I have a lot of money sitting around and I don't feel like it's allocated very efficiently. As mentioned in the linked post I live on Long Island, and work in NYC. I live at home and don't feel as though I can move out. I live and budget my life as though I were on my own, and the money I would use for rent, becomes my savings. But that 'rent' money isn't actually enough for a real apartment (at least nowhere that isn't Bed-Stuy or the wasteland of downtown Brooklyn), so it just becomes savings. Mind you, I consider maxing out my IRA every year to be a priority, so that comes before rent money, thus my reasoning for not having enough for rent. It is unacceptable to not continue saving, and the limit for the IRA is so small anyway not maxing it means I lose that many more thousands in compounding when I need it later in life. I don't have any debt, thankfully. And my only long term goal is some vague notion of maybe someday possibly at some point at an undetermined time in the future of owning a small home down south where cost of living is much lower and eke out the rest of my life down there... GET TO THE POINT rear end in a top hat! Jeez OK... So I'm not pursuing any current goals, and I'm living my life as frugally as I can and really just hoarding money in a very inefficient way and not getting to enjoy any part of it while not taking concrete steps to achieve my very vague dream. Writing that out actually made me realize I'm on a straight track to suicidal depression (I think I've already passed the first stop, Unhappy Junction.) if I don't get organized and figure out how I can take concrete steps to get somewhere with my life and not be 31 living with my parents.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 16:22
|
|
|
Nocheez posted:https://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-20/the-financial-planning-flowchart I don't want to detract from this excellent flow chart, and don't disagree with any of it, but just want to observe that more ink is spilled in the financial press telling rich people with great careers that they are not saving enough, and virtually nothing written about poor people who aren't saving/can't save anything. They know who their readership is, but I can't help observing that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 16:36
|
|
|
Why would they be interested in helping the poor save money? The more they save the less they can extract for themselves.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 16:57
|
|
|
SeaWolf posted:As far as talking to my company about the 401k I could, but I'm sure it would be a wasted effort. The person in charge of it is HR and the company accountant and the #2 man in the company. He thinks he knows everything. In reality, you making $40k means you should be able to put as much into your 401k as you want. It sounds like they may be committing fraud and reserving the 401k for what would otherwise normally be the highly compensated or key employees by artificially limiting the pool of employees such that their salaries are no longer in the top 20%. http://www.shrm.org/hrdisciplines/benefits/Articles/Pages/CMS_017663.aspx They may have some other financial shenanigans going on, but them telling you to stay out of the 401k sets off red flags everywhere. Or they could just be incompetent. Edit: this is all  and is pure conjecture and my interpretation of the IRS rules may not have any basis in reality.
baquerd fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Aug 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 17:03
|
|
|
baquerd posted:In reality, you making $40k means you should be able to put as much into your 401k as you want. Oh they're pretty scummy in other areas. In this case he's just an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 17:08
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:I don't want to detract from this excellent flow chart, and don't disagree with any of it, but just want to observe that more ink is spilled in the financial press telling rich people with great careers that they are not saving enough, and virtually nothing written about poor people who aren't saving/can't save anything. They know who their readership is, but I can't help observing that. True, but when it comes to poor people usually the only advice that will really help is "make more money"
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 18:15
|
|
|
Harry posted:True, but when it comes to poor people usually the only advice that will really help is "make more money" Seriously guys, stop being poor. It's depressing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 18:41
|
|
|
SlightlyMadman posted:Seriously guys, stop being poor. It's depressing. Admittedly the current system where the poor work depressing jobs that no one else wants and don't make enough to live is very profitable for big business. Even better is when they invariably need government benefits to make ends meet, all of us get to pay for it, not the place that pays crap wages. Even better still, you blame the recipients for freeloading and being lazy welfare queens because they must be too lazy to get a better job. If you ever try to tax big business profits at any level that makes sense, then they are the victims. "Why are you taxing us, the job creators? Why do you hate America?" 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
You guys confuse the issue with your 'poor' and 'rich' labels. The only class difference in is the 'already rich' and 'soon-to-be-rich'.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 19:41
|
|
|
SlightlyMadman posted:Seriously guys, stop being poor. It's depressing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 20:00
|
|
|
Harry posted:Seriously, what can you say to someone who's making $15,000 on how to get ahead? You need a certain income level to even begin to have a chance of saving. They need to move in with their parents if that's a possibility and never spend money on anything that's not absolutely essential. It wouldn't be a good life, but they could survive, max out their IRA savings, and pay zero income taxes from the saver's credit. Their health care will soon be covered at a relatively nominal fee. Food stamps and welfare should be within reach too, especially if they get a kid or simply work a few less hours (food stamps where I'm at kick in at $14k a year single, $19k with a kid). They need to buy everything used off craigslist, sell any cars they have and bicycle to work. Most people won't have the kind of mental fortitude and willpower to do that, and I'm not saying I would either, but they can save and live on that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 20:34
|
|
|
What about those who either don't have parents, have lovely parents or have poor parents themselves? Ie: most of the poor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
Orange_Lazarus posted:What about those who either don't have parents, have lovely parents or have poor parents themselves? Ie: most of the poor. Affordable housing in reasonable neighborhoods is definitely the single biggest problem at that level of income without family support. Living in a terrible neighborhood where your bike gets stolen out of a locked apartment or you're 30 miles from work would be soul crushing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
baquerd posted:They need to move in with their parents if that's a possibility and never spend money on anything that's not absolutely essential. It wouldn't be a good life, but they could survive, max out their IRA savings, and pay zero income taxes from the saver's credit. Their health care will soon be covered at a relatively nominal fee. Food stamps and welfare should be within reach too, especially if they get a kid or simply work a few less hours (food stamps where I'm at kick in at $14k a year single, $19k with a kid). They need to buy everything used off craigslist, sell any cars they have and bicycle to work. Even then, that's treading water until you get to the point where you have to make more money.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Food stamps and welfare should be within reach too, especially if they get a kid or simply work a few less hours (food stamps where I'm at kick in at $14k a year single, $19k with a kid). Having savings will often make you ineligible for welfare. This includes food stamps and affordable housing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 21:14
|
|
|
I am currently contributing to a 403(b) plan through my employer, however I will not start receiving a match on my contributions until January 2015 (i.e. it's not a issue of being partially vs fully vested - I get zero contributions from my employer until that point). This got me thinking of suspending my contributions to the 403(b) and instead contributing to an IRA through Vanguard (at least until the match kicks in) which I have set up with a simple mix of bond and stock index funds that is currently funded by a rollover from a previous employer. I have read that actively managed funds such as those in my 403(b) are notoriously bad with regard to management fees and without the benefit of a company match, I don't see much advantage to contributing to the 403(b) right now. After looking into it, it seems my income is above the phase-out for a deduction, so if I contribute to an IRA in this scenario, wouldn't I potentially be taxed twice (once since I am contributing after-tax income, and twice when I withdraw at retirement)? Or is there a way to have pre-tax money deposited into the IRA with Vanguard? I guess I am just trying to find the best option in light of the lack of company match and my ineligibility for income tax deduction for IRA contributions. Thanks in advance for any advice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 23:38
|
|
|
I just got my first big person job after being in academia forever, so I was hoping for some free financial guidance to tell me whether I'm being an idiot here. With the new cheddar rolling in, I'm taking in (after taxes + deductions) $6000 / month, while my wife is hauling home $2400 / month. She makes less, but also has better benefit options, so part of the reason her take-home is less is because we're both on her dental + health plans. She also has 401(k) matching at her work, so she's maxing that out wisely and I think it's on its way with some reasonable trend. Our breakdown is that we both take $1200 / month for personal expenses, so that what's left goes into rent (currently at $2100 but budgeted to go up to $3000 in the near future), joint expenses (not well tracked, but well under out ceiling budge of $1500 / a month) and joint savings (just started at $1500 / a month). All this adds up to our combined take-home of $8400 / month. The joint savings is so that in 4 or 5 years we'll have a decent chunk for a down-payment on a house. This all seems sensible, with the obvious omissions of 1) debt (I owe about $5k in student loans and about $2500 on a credit card, which should be no problem to wipe out quickly) and 2) retirement, which currently I do not have a good plan for. The main concern I guess is the latter. I'm waiting until the debt is gone to start taking the concern seriously (which I guess is only a couple months from now), but I'd like to get some sort of plan together of a base amount to start squirreling away somewhere in some logical way... $500 / month into a personal 401(k)? A Roth IRA? Bonds? Go $1000 / month instead and skimp on joint stuff? Some vague guidance and a direction to start going would probably be enough. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
What "personal expenses" require $1200 a month per person? That's $29,000 a year in spending money for the both of you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 23:07
|
|
|
Clothes, booze, dinners, haircuts, gifts, trips, coffee, etc. Also any personal debts that aren't joint debts (like my credit card). A lot of it effectively gets saved, but it's not money that I would call planned savings, since it might not be used for savings in any given month.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 00:41
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:What "personal expenses" require $1200 a month per person? That's $29,000 a year in spending money for the both of you. $40 a day. It's not frugal but it's not completely insane.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 00:55
|
|
|
True it's not terrible. But you can probably trim some of that stuff down and find your $500 a month. Bonus! Drinking and eating out less is also good for your waistline as well as your bank account.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 06:23
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:True it's not terrible. But you can probably trim some of that stuff down and find your $500 a month. Bonus! Drinking and eating out less is also good for your waistline as well as your bank account. 500 a month may be a bit low depending on where they live (it's likely in one of the main cities, given the estimated $3000 price tag for rent). There are two ways to tackle this. One is to try to live in a cheaper area or house, as 3000/month is extremely expensive. There are only two plausible locations where I can see a 3000/month for a 2 bedroom, and those are SF and NY. Even in those two locations, it should be possible to decrease the total rent price. The second is to decrease expenses. I'd say that 800-900/month is doable, and that would be enough for you to maximize your 401k. If both you and your wife are maxing your 401ks, that should be enough for the retirement aspect of things for now, assuming that you're in your 20s (otherwise, you need to save more). One last thing: are you sure that $1500/month is enough for the down payment of a house? If your rent prices are typically 3000/month, then the numbers don't add up for a 20% down payment in 5 years. ntan1 fucked around with this message at 07:41 on Sep 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 07:39
|
|
|
Well in my mind the "tackle this" wasn't so much finding money as much as it was asking for whether the budget was reasonable. But yeah it's clear I didn't think too hard about the downpayment size, and haven't thought about putting away a chunk of savings for if things unexpectedly go sideways with my career (hopefully unlikely). A house where we'd want one would be in the 700K - 1M range, so we're more likely to be able to hit 10% downpayment than 20%. It's not ideal, but that might be reality. Especially if we want to hold some cash reserves. And as I mentioned my company's 401(k) doesn't do matching, but I'll try to run numbers on what's a good amount to contribute as soon as I pay off the consumer debts in a month or so. In the mean time, my wife agrees that our personal funbux are a good deal higher than we need, so we'll adjust when we do a couple of trial run months and see what we're actually using (maybe more like 600-800 in her case and less in mine since my work feeds me and gives me coffee and beer). I am worried about retirement money since I'm 30 (lots of schoolin') and have all of butkus right now except little debt. There might be some scrimping to get the contribution for that closer to 1000 / month. If you ever wanted to meet those assholes who make 6 figures and complain about how they're not at all rich because they live in an expensive city, I guess "hello"
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 16:27
|
|
|
I saw the stock thread; is there a forex thread?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 09:27
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:I saw the stock thread; is there a forex thread? No, there isn't. If I were to write that OP, it would read "What are you, insane? Don't even try this unless you are doing it professionally." For a less snarky answer, maybe ask in the stock thread anyway. I'm sure there's at least one person there who would disagree with me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 02:48
|
|
|
This seems to be the best place for a credit card question: I just found out that one of my cards was compromised. Somebody tried to make a $750 charge on some computer parts website I'd never heard of. I called the CC company and they reversed the charge, canceled the card, and will issue me a new one. How will this look on my credit report?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 03:44
|
|
|
Mister Kingdom posted:This seems to be the best place for a credit card question: It will not show up in any way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 03:58
|
|
|
My wife's coworker did something I hadn't really thought of before but makes sense. She took an equity loan out on her house to essentially consolidate her kids student loans. (yeah, I know, lucky rear end kids.) I have around 41,000 dollars in student loans and around 12 percent equity in my house. I work for the government, permanent union so I essentially can't be fired without doing something totally out of line. My wife is in the service industry, so her financials aren't as regular as mine, but she does well. What would be the negatives of this? Between my multiple student loans I don't think I would take a huge hit as far as interest rate, plus it would reduce my monthly pay expenditure which as I promote up, I could just start paying more. And god forbid something happens, and I bankrupted (there's no way I can see this happening) I would be able to wipe the student loan debt. Are there negatives to this I'm not seeing? I'm guessing 12 percent equity means I can't do it now, but around 20 percent?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 04:53
|
|
|
OlyMike posted:Are there negatives to this I'm not seeing? I'm guessing 12 percent equity means I can't do it now, but around 20 percent? The total that you owe with both mortgage+HEL(OC) should be 80% of value to get rates that would beat student loans. Paying down a lower-interest loan to get space to transfer higher-interest debt will guarantee you pay more than throwing the extra at the high-interest debt in the first place. Since you're only at 12% equity, you'll likely be most of the way through your student loan by the time you get 20+change without any extra payments.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 06:31
|
|
|
Since you work for the government aren't there forgiveness programs you can take advantage of?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 13:56
|
|
|
100 HOGS AGREE posted:Since you work for the government aren't there forgiveness programs you can take advantage of? You have to make 120 full payments first it would appear. I'm guessing I'd have them payed off by then, or close enough that it's not really a thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 14:54
|
|
|
OlyMike posted:You have to make 120 full payments first it would appear. I'm guessing I'd have them payed off by then, or close enough that it's not really a thing. Considering most student loans are on a 10 year ammortization, yes you would have paid it off. Most forgiveness or shared repayment plans are either through the military (SLRP) or department of education (where you go working in the inner city or some super rural area for 5+ years where they have difficulty finding teachers because the conditions suck.) The only real advantage for swapping potentially subsidized student loan debt for secured debt would be to make it dischargable in bankruptcy, but you would still have to wait several years to file and not have the bankruptcy court undo the transaction to make it dischargable. By which point you would be in foreclosure on the secured debt or paying it and the court would have you reaffirm that debt anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 15:34
|
|
|
OlyMike posted:My wife's coworker did something I hadn't really thought of before but makes sense. She took an equity loan out on her house to essentially consolidate her kids student loans. (yeah, I know, lucky rear end kids.) I have around 41,000 dollars in student loans and around 12 percent equity in my house. I work for the government, permanent union so I essentially can't be fired without doing something totally out of line. My wife is in the service industry, so her financials aren't as regular as mine, but she does well. It’s actually a pretty stupid idea. If you wanted to help your kids out by paying off their student loans, assuming they are responsible and you have the money, that is an enormous gift and a great way to help them. But if you have to take an equity line out to do it, that by definition means you don’t have the money. Also, on a related point, having equity in your house is not the same thing as having money. If your wife’s coworker if she has college age kids with that much debt I’m guessing is in her 50’s or 60’s, meaning she is looking at retiring with a mortgage and a big fat HELOC. This attitude of using your equity to smooth everything out without ever paying anything off is how people can owe more on their houses than when they bought them in spite of making mortgage payments for decades. Your wife’s coworker’s house is only safe for as long as her health allows her to keep working because should that ever change she will struggle to keep the whole thing going and if she ever does have to sell it, she will have less money at time in her life when she needs it the most. You don’t have enough equity to do any such thing, and you are in debt up to your eyeballs too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
My husband recently inherited $25,000 from his grandmother. We also just learned that we will be receiving $7,000 quarterly from a family trust. He comes from a wealthy family, so their financial adviser is working with us. I'm a little iffy about some of his recommendations. Here's our financial situation: Income Gross for me is $22.35/hr, he will be starting a new job at ~$16/hr in a week or so. After health insurance, HSA, taxes, etc., our net will be ~$4,619/mo (assuming a 4-week month). Debt Student Loan: $24,320 balance, $296/mo payment plan Discover Card: $8,500 balance, $219/mo minimum payment (this was just paid off with the inheritance) Budget - this is direct from YNAB, so it's needlessly detailed. Monthly Bills Rent: $1,089 Water/Garbage/Gas/Electric: $135 Internet: $83 Cell Phones: $115 Everyday Expenses Groceries: $500 Restaurants: $50 Pharmacy: $50 Household Goods: $51 Clothing: $100 Tools & Work Supplies: $25 Toiletries: $40 Haircuts: $25 Vehicles Gas: $142 (cost of 1 tank of gas per car, plus gas for motorcycle. We usually spend less than half of this per month because I walk to work.) Repairs: $75 Insurance: $73 Registration: $24 Roadside Assistance: $8 Parking/Public Transportation: $2 Hobbies & Entertainment Miscellaneous: $15 Books, Newspaper, Magazines: $35 Gym: $15 Ancestry: $25 Amazon Prime: $6.25 Band Expenses: $10 Brewing: $10 Social - Drinks, Movies, etc.: $20 Long Term Spending & Savings Gifts: $50 Vacation: $50 Automatic Transfer to Savings: $150 Student Loan Payment: $296 ------ Budgeted total: $3,269.25 Remaining: ~$1,300 Accounts Emergency Fund: $10,000 My IRA: ~$11,000 His IRA: ~$55,000 So, my first thought was to throw money at the student loan until it goes away, meaning the rest of the inheritance plus our monthly surplus. Then we can take the quarterly money and use it to fund our IRAs. Anything left over after that can go into a long-term house buying fund. Our adviser wants us to bump the emergency fund up to $15,000 with the inheritance, which is fine. He doesn't want us to pay off the loan too early, as he thinks it's valuable to improve my husband's credit over time. This seems unnecessary to me, but I figure we can at least put a total of $600/mo towards the loan so we're not paying it off for 9 more years. He wants us to put the remaining $11,500 from the inheritance into a house fund, and says that this should be our priority. I figure we can contribute an additional $1,000 to it every month, if that's what he thinks is best. What's weird to me is that he's advising that we not use the quarterly money to fund our IRAs, but instead put that money in the house fund as well. This seems kind of crazy to me. Am I wrong in thinking that it's a bad idea?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 17:28
|
|