|
I would say this explains the benefit of a dividend yield stock, as now that the price of the stock has risen, you now have more stocks due to the dividend payout.
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2017 13:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:40 |
|
|
kys posted:I would say this explains the benefit of a dividend yield stock, as now that the price of the stock has risen, you now have more stocks due to the dividend payout. Except the stock price has dropped because of the dividend being paid out. Some companies buy back their stock because it drives up the stock price (reduced number of shares) and capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than dividends. That's one of the problems with using dividends to estimate stock market return.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
No, qualified dividends exist. Most of the types of investments that FIers would consider e.g., passive ETFs offer qualified dividends (QDI) which are subject to the same tax rates as long term capital gains. There is the caveat that if you're interested in offshore securities, they may not qualify for this. Most reputable fund houses like Vanguard publish the average proportion of stocks that qualify on a fund level. For example 100% of stocks in the S&P500 ETF qualify under this scheme versus 85% for the Total World ETF. And what kys said doesn't make any sense either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:No, qualified dividends exist. With Total World/International you get the Foreign Tax Credit at least, which helps offset some of the dividends. Also I believe the 100% for the S&P 500 fund is technically due to rounding - if it's above 95% then the fund is allowed to round it to 100%. Total Stock didn't make it last year and so investors got stuck with non-QDI. Regardless, you have to pay taxes on dividends the year they are paid; you have to pay taxes on capital gains when you sell the stock/fund. If you are going for FIRE, you probably would prefer to push taxes into your retirement years (and a lower tax bracket) so it's preferable to have capital gains due to rising NAV/share price than dividends purely from a tax perspective.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:42
|
|
|
That's a fair point and it's been a reason why US firms have moved towards buybacks over dividends since the 90s. There's a broader discussion about dividend policy to be had but I suspect this is enough of a derail.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 01:34
|
|
|
Lmao https://twitter.com/reformedbroker/status/845251220038193152
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 06:04
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/dril/status/384408932061417472?lang=sv
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 06:19
|
|
|
I mean are you gonna give them poo poo for 18k to charity? The rest, fine, but that one stood out to me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 06:43
|
|
|
Someone post the WSJ 250K image please.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 07:01
|
|
|
VendaGoat posted:I mean are you gonna give them poo poo for 18k to charity? Not sure I'd count college alumni as "charity" with how many billions of dollars some of them have.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 09:35
|
|
|
waaaahhh, I only get to live in a 1.5M house and take three vacations a year and go out on fancy dates twice a month, why is my life so AVERAGE
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
Financial Samurai posted:Pushback #4: $12,000 in music and sports lessons?! Get into private high school, so they can get into a private college, so they can get into private law school, and do exactly what their parents are doing? When does the madness end? Surely they wouldn't want the same life for their kids? Do children who grow up in this kind of environment ever have more positive outcomes than what their parents had? Seems to me that the chances of maintaining the same lifestyle are fairly high, while there's a lesser chance of both higher success, or total gently caress-up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 16:46
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:Not sure I'd count college alumni as "charity" with how many billions of dollars some of them have. Point. Charity is still charity and the donor gets to choose where it goes. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:Not sure I'd count college alumni as "charity" with how many billions of dollars some of them have. Typically, the donations to colleges go directly into an endowment fund used chiefly for scholarships and financial aid or for specific purposes; it's not a slush fund for general operating expenses. Bhodi fucked around with this message at 20:34 on Mar 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
VendaGoat posted:Point. Charity is still charity and the donor gets to choose where it goes. Bhodi posted:Typically, the donations to colleges go directly into an endowment fund used chiefly for scholarships and financial aid or for specific purposes; it's not a slush fund for general operating expenses.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 03:09
|
|
|
Their 'charity' allocation is like < 7% of their total expenses so I'm not sure why people are focusing on that. I'd argue the two main drivers of rising tuition costs in the US are 1) reduced public funding (esp. for state schools), and 2) the hosed financial aid-student setup.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
Ralith posted:Not all charities are equal. Donating money (or time, for that matter) to a charity that doesn't accomplish anything useful for your marginal dollar is not a good use of resources. As I said, point. shrike82 posted:Their 'charity' allocation is like < 7% of their total expenses so I'm not sure why people are focusing on that. Because it's someone's yearly salary. Everything else can be slashed and loving burned to the god damned ground if they wanted it bad enough.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
Ralith posted:Donations earmarked for financial aid can be easily laundered into free money by increasing costs proportional to increased aid. I understand that this is a big part of why tuition is so ridiculous in the US these days. I was thinking this earlier today after reading the previous post. Subsidizing the cost of any highly competitive thing (university, housing) just inflates the cost. But I imagine any parents donating to their alma mater are simply putting an ace in the hole in the event little Johnny is a fringe applicant. But why not just stash the cash away and invest the cash lump-sum if Johnny needs help getting into Harvard? Rick Rickshaw fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Mar 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 04:21
|
|
|
Rick Rickshaw posted:I was thinking this earlier today after reading the previous post. Subsidizing the cost of any highly competitive thing (university, housing) just inflates the cost. Because some rear end clown predecessor has done this before and they are the holders of the wanted commodity?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
You'll need millions (tens?) these days for an Ivy admin to bypass admissions
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Someone post the WSJ 250K image please. gently caress it, I'll do it myself WSJ article titled 'Struggling on 250K a year' from a couple years back 
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
Who owns two cars in NYC? Also, who lives in NYC and doesn't put "parking" as a (quite high) expense if they do own two cars? That + the undergrad debt that very few (if any) are going to have at that level for "10-20 years" frees up about $50k. I do just fine on $300k in NYC
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
Vomik posted:Who owns two cars in NYC? NYC is composed of more than Manhattan, and even in Manhattan parking could be a part of their housing costs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 23:17
|
|
|
You can park for free on most Manhattan streets outside of Midtown and Downtown if you're willing to move the car frequently and waste a bunch of time circling the block for spots
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 00:29
|
|
|
pig slut lisa posted:You can park for free on most Manhattan streets outside of Midtown and Downtown if you're willing to move the car frequently and waste a bunch of time circling the block for spots Time is money friendo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 00:36
|
|
|
I do like how they spend almost all of their money and then feel average. They should have changed the misc. category to candles though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Wow that samurai guy sure seems like a gigantic shithead between that "500k isn't rich u guys" and "taxes are soooo unfair why does the government discriminate against captains of industry". Fuuuuuuuuuck yoooouuuuuu.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
Guest2553 posted:Wow that samurai guy sure seems like a gigantic shithead between that "500k isn't rich u guys" and "taxes are soooo unfair why does the government discriminate against captains of industry". Fuuuuuuuuuck yoooouuuuuu. That was a really good post. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
Devian666 posted:I do like how they spend almost all of their money and then feel average. They should have changed the misc. category to candles though. I feel like this would have ruined the fantastic satire.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
I personally like the 'Clothes for 4 people (no fancy bags, shoes, or threads)' line item. Anyway rich people budgets like these are why I believe qualitatively in the 75K Kahneman finding (i.e., higher income != more happy).
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 01:35
|
|
|
I only just realize that a higher income results in higher standard of living which requires more saving for retirement to sustain that higher standard of living and on it goes. Somewhere I guess, if you are content at the lower end the higher standard of living is not worth the effort, but 75k is probably very dependent on location.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
Mercury Ballistic posted:I only just realize that a higher income results in higher standard of living which requires more saving for retirement to sustain that higher standard of living and on it goes. Somewhere I guess, if you are content at the lower end the higher standard of living is not worth the effort, but 75k is probably very dependent on location. Yes. Congrats.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 01:44
|
|
|
The capital T truth is about (how you enjoy your short time on this earth, not what you spend). It is about the real value of a (life well lived), which has almost nothing to do with (money) and everything to do with simple awareness: awareness of what is so real and essential, so hidden in plain sight all around us, all the time, that we have to keep reminding ourselves over and over: "This is water." "This is water." Adapted from David Foster Wallace's Kenyon Commencement Speech.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 13:29
|
|
|
those poor people with investment income, oh how they suffer
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 14:56
|
|
|
Guest2553 posted:Wow that samurai guy sure seems like a gigantic shithead between that "500k isn't rich u guys" and "taxes are soooo unfair why does the government discriminate against captains of industry". Fuuuuuuuuuck yoooouuuuuu.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:David Foster Wallace's Kenyon Commencement Speech. Thank you for introducing me to this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
VendaGoat posted:Thank you for introducing me to this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
VendaGoat posted:Thank you for introducing me to this. Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:It's probably something the 2cool4skool goons love to hate, but uhh, I recommend reading every word that guy ever wrote. The guy was obviously brilliant, which I could tell from just a small sample of his writing, and had a lot of interesting stuff to say. Above my desk at work I have this section of that speech printed out. I love his essays, I love his novels, I love his articles, he's my absolute favorite of all time, and an incredibly good reminder of the dangers of mental illness.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
I don't really read FI stuff anymore as once you figure out the basics there's honestly nothing really else to read that is new or just a twist on an existing theme, but I took a look at MrMoneyMustache's site after about a year of not visiting and it looks like that dude finally realized he can actually live pretty comfortable spending a little more money without being stupidly lavish. He bought a brand new electric car which seems contrary to his mantra of keeping an old fuel efficient car and and a few other lifestyle improving things. He built a new wing to his house when previously he'd just tell you not to own so much poo poo. I wonder if he realized he didn't really need to be a "any discretionary spending means a punch in face no car clowns allowed" meme anymore since he's sitting on an actual mountain of money from his site, or if his wife told him to let them live a little. She didn't seem as excited as he was about the whole lifestyle when they did that tv segment about him. Either way I don't blame the guy, it looks like he's still sticking to his principles even if his "lifestyle" mantra is arguably slipping compared to his original rants that made him so popular. Don't really have anything to argue, just thought I'd bring this thread back from the dead. 
Minty Swagger fucked around with this message at 15:19 on Apr 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:40 |
|
|
To an extent, isn't that the point? Dropping your job once you can survive off capital income is great, but if you end up with additional income - whether it's ad hoc labor or excess capital returns - why not sink it into consumption?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 02:04
|
|
