some time ago i wanted go off the grid and 'disappear' but would rather put my new found gift to share with those less fortunate
i don't wanna die with my barns full.
since this is not a religious or philosophy site, i'd still down size and put some in gold, maybe 100k and the rest i'd say just good ole USD (for now)
<< <i>There are some EXCELLENT values in the muni market.
Gecko, the munipalities problems can be fixed. Its called salary and benefit cuts. Be prepared. >>
How do you fix unfunded pension liabilities that by themselves could bankrupt the promising entities? >>
Easy. Either dont pay them or pay reduced benefits. The quicker the public employees realize these "promises" are egregious, the easier the transition to reality.
The protests people should be concerned with are not those against the evil banksters, but rather against the overpaid public employee as these will truely be neighbor vs neighbor clashes. Your neighbor will not take kindly to higher taxes so you can retire at 50 with a 6-figure salary and full heath care benefits.
To answer the OP---my choice would be a laddered portfolio of Certificates of Deposit or daytrading. >>
Egregious promises? What about my "egregious promise" to give up my own safety and perhaps life in the pursuit of saving one of those taxpayers? I have held up my end of the bargain. The real question is will you hold up yours? >>
The profession of fighterfighter was your choice. You knew the risks and rewards and made a choice. I am sure the residents of Chicago are very thankful for your service and are proving it by paying you a much above average salary. To continue to ask for this much above average salary after the age of 50 (in retirement) is, i am sure to the residents of Chicago, to be egregious. The people of Chicago may in fact pay you more while you are retired, than they did while you were working. But dont feel bad, there are millions of public employees who WILL also see their benefits cut. Dont take it personally, its just what the economy is demanding.
But as Baley said this thread has really been derailed. Sorry pmcollectour. I am really in amazement of the idea of risk-free and sportscards. >>
I was fully aware of the risks and the rewards when I accepted the job at age 23.
Part of the risks/drawbacks:
Ultra hazardous working conditions.....probable injuries.....possible death.....shortened lifespan.....missed birthdays/holidays with family.....long hours.
Part of the rewards:
Excellent job security.....immense self satisfaction from job.....fair salary....good benefits, INCLUDING a defined benefit pension plan.
So you are correct.....I did know the risks and subsequent rewards when I signed up. Again.....I have honored my end of the deal.....will you honor your end?
<< <i>When the politicians and unions work together to make the deal, we the people had no say in the deal to honor. There's your discontent, politely. >>
Completely incorrect. You had not 1, but actually 2 "says" in the deal. The 1st "say" was when you elected that politician to represent you. Thats enough in itself. But you had a 2nd "say" in the deal when you agreed to pay property taxes in the city in which you live. You surely want my service, but you dont want to pay for it. Is that what im to understand?
<< <i>No point in further pointing out the flaw in your objectives. >>
I present no flaws nor objectives. I present facts. I was contracted to do a job for "X" compensation & benefits. I agreed to the terms. Now....much later in the game you wish to redefine those original terms. Sorry...not gonna happen. In legal circles, you are talking about theft of services.
Go get a blown car motor rebuilt for $3500 and then when its done, and you have your car back....stop payment on the check you wrote because you "re-thought" the agreement you originally made. This is the same concept you condone with me? Good luck pal.....see you in court.....where my pension is guaranteed by the Illinois state constitution by the way.
<< <i>I don't want your services. I pay taxes for them, I do not expect an additional bill for covering your pension mishandlings. I pay the insurance game to cover my loss for not wanting to double pay for your 20 year career and 45 year 80% salary retirement plan.
No point in further pointing out the flaw in your objectives. >>
20 years at 80%? Ahhhhhh, now i see why you talk the way you do....you are ignorant on the material. We have a 30 years of service with 75% benefit. Your tax bill has ALWAYS supplemented the municipal pensions...its not some new concept. You pay for my service today AND my retirement tomorrow. In return, I voluntarily risk my life to save your kid's life in the event you experience a fire. Thats the deal....got it?
<< <i>I worked for the state for years Phil. I say it like I know it. >>
Ok, so then why do you think its fair....or even acceptable to reduce or eliminate pensions for those who have paid into the system for decades with the understanding that they have enough of a retirement fund?
As you know, im NOT eligible to receive a dime of social security because of my municipal pension. Thats another thing I was well aware of when I signed on to this job. I have done what was asked of me both financially (9.125% of every check I ever earned has been deducted and placed in my pension fund) as well as perform my duties to the fullest extent of my abilities.
And now.....in midstream....you want the terms changed????
I don't think the fight over pensions should go down between the firefighter and the taxpayer. Their are way to many variables in between the two parties that were set up that have led to this problem. Underfunded pension obligations, overzealous return assumptions, underzealous cost assumptions, under aggressive mortality rates. Most of these are set up by the people between the firefighter and taxpayer. The contract (salary and pension) that the firefighter agreed to by itself isn't huge on its own, but when it is amplified through multiple "bad" assumptions about the future value of those benefit/obligations and how best to get to that number, it can have a massive impact. (if you disagree, feel free to pm me and we can have a friendly discussion.)
Bringing the thread back on topic. Based upon the ops criteria
<< <i>It's not money you want to spend. You just want to put it in a safe place. You don't want high risk. Your main concern is safety, and to keep it out of the hands of those who can rob you. You want to avoid the Bernie Madoff's of the world. >>
here is what I would do.
A.) Don't give it to someone else to manage. If you want to avoid the Madoff's of the world completely, their is only one way. Do it yourself.
B.) My main concern is safety of principal (per OP) and I don't want high risk. So equities are out. I also want to keep it out of the hands of those who can rob me (including govt). So assuming no impending apocalypse or complete govt meltdown, I would invest the money per below.
1.) 1/3 in high grade corporate bonds. These are taxable, but their after tax yields are historically higher then high grade municipals or govt securities. 2.) 1/3 in high grade essential service revenue municipal bonds. By this I mean bonds that are backed by essential municipal services. Water, Sewer, Electric, Transportation. This also helps protect against rising tax rates as municipals are federal tax free. They are also state/city/local tax free depending on if the bonds are in the municipality you live in (their are always exceptions to the rule). 3.) 1/3 in precious metals. Historically have been a pretty good hedge against inflation.
Since all my debt obligations are paid, and assuming I still have a job of some sorts, I feel this would be my best option of protecting my principal over the long haul while also generating a decent (not great) return on my extra lump sum.
<< <i>So it really is no different than social security. Not enough money to fund the retiring baby-boomers. >>
Can you imagine if SS promised you 75% of your working wage upon retirement. I have no problem with pension plans offering such a generous benefit as long the employee share and any employer match can cover the payout. To expect the taxpayers to make up the difference is ludicrous. Civil servants should have to plan for retirement with 401Ks and IRAs just like the rest of us.
erickso1 look out for the sticks and stones our delusional`firefighter will be slinging when he sees you suggested more bonds. I was called soft in the head for suggesting muni's earlier. Maybe there will be something better in store for you since you do this for a living
MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Gecko when the system implodes and it will one day, I personally think it would be immoral for them not to pay you back every cent you personally put into the plan. That maybe the only think you get. After that I think it will be real messy and folks will get kicked to the curb with either no benefits or drastically reduced benefits at best. It's hard to imagine a scenario in which this won't happen. Prepare for it. Is it fair? No it isn't. It sucks. However having it suck won't change a thing. Your gig and many others are unsustainable and when the bodies start hitting the floor you guys will be the first to taste cement.
Personally if I were you I'd be pissed also. But, that's not going to change how it's gonna to go down. Suck it up and plan your escape from the system at your terms. Prepare for the day. Winter is coming.............MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
If we have built-in inflation (whether acknowledged or not) and with the potential for a rise in tax rates (scheduled for 2014 under obamacare), any asset with turnover and tax liabilities is going to be severely eroded.
What does that mean? It means that every time you "take profits" you are losing a chunk of the real asset to taxes. In an inflationary environment, those chunks paid out as taxes reduce the size of your real-life assets. The dollar amount goes up, and the amount of the physical investment gets smaller.
You have to be one heckuva trader to overcome a tax bite and still maintain your real capital. Everyone can't do it, because 50% of every trade involves a losing side. That's why leverage becomes so hyped as things progress - after a score or two on leverage, you begin to think you are invincible. (You aren't.)
Be careful of making a trading account out of any money in an inflationary environment. Of course, if you have losses they will mitigate and offset some gains but inflation changes everything with respect to "gains".
Keep a handle on the inflation numbers, and plan accordingly.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>Gecko when the system implodes and it will one day, I personally think it would be immoral for them not to pay you back every cent you personally put into the plan. That maybe the only think you get. After that I think it will be real messy and folks will get kicked to the curb with either no benefits or drastically reduced benefits at best. It's hard to imagine a scenario in which this won't happen. Prepare for it. Is it fair? No it isn't. It sucks. However having it suck won't change a thing. Your gig and many others are unsustainable and when the bodies start hitting the floor you guys will be the first to taste cement.
Personally if I were you I'd be pissed also. But, that's not going to change how it's gonna to go down. Suck it up and plan your escape from the system at your terms. Prepare for the day. Winter is coming.............MJ >>
As a municipal employee myself, Im fine with that. Give me back everything that I paid into it and I'll dump it into my 457b. Let me keep the 11% per week and I'll invest it on my own. When I got hired 10 years ago everyone was encouraged to take out a retirement plan on their own. I guess the writing has been on the wall for some time now.
Ok, so then why do you think its fair....or even acceptable to reduce or eliminate pensions for those who have paid into the system for decades with the understanding that they have enough of a retirement fund? >>
No easy solution here. Why is it fair that Illinois raise my taxes to pay for state work pensions? Why don't our goophy politicians encourage job growth and industrial development. If I were a state or gov worker, I'd go after the politicians, not the tax payers. We don't get anything out of funding your retirements (by the way, I'm in the ILL SURS pension program, so I have an interest in getting as much of my pension as I can).
"Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world." PBShelley
Comments
<< <i>Hookers, blow and half eagles.
I don't understand your logic. Why the half eagles?
I think it's the alliteration!
some time ago i wanted go off the grid and 'disappear' but would rather put my new found gift to share with those less fortunate
i don't wanna die with my barns full.
since this is not a religious or philosophy site, i'd still down size and put some in gold, maybe 100k and the rest i'd say just good ole USD (for now)
<< <i>Hookers, blow and half eagles.
I don't understand your logic. Why the half eagles?
Reminds me of the guy who spent most of his money on booze and women, the rest he "pissed away"
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>There are some EXCELLENT values in the muni market.
Gecko, the munipalities problems can be fixed. Its called salary and benefit cuts. Be prepared. >>
How do you fix unfunded pension liabilities that by themselves could bankrupt the promising entities? >>
Easy. Either dont pay them or pay reduced benefits. The quicker the public employees realize these "promises" are egregious, the easier the transition to reality.
The protests people should be concerned with are not those against the evil banksters, but rather against the overpaid public employee as these will truely be neighbor vs neighbor clashes. Your neighbor will not take kindly to higher taxes so you can retire at 50 with a 6-figure salary and full heath care benefits.
To answer the OP---my choice would be a laddered portfolio of Certificates of Deposit or daytrading.
Egregious promises? What about my "egregious promise" to give up my own safety and perhaps life in the pursuit of saving one of those taxpayers? I have held up my end of the bargain. The real question is will you hold up yours?
The profession of fighterfighter was your choice. You knew the risks and rewards and made a choice. I am sure the residents of Chicago are very thankful for your service and are proving it by paying you a much above average salary. To continue to ask for this much above average salary after the age of 50 (in retirement) is, i am sure to the residents of Chicago, to be egregious. The people of Chicago may in fact pay you more while you are retired, than they did while you were working. But dont feel bad, there are millions of public employees who WILL also see their benefits cut. Dont take it personally, its just what the economy is demanding.
But as Baley said this thread has really been derailed. Sorry pmcollectour.
I was fully aware of the risks and the rewards when I accepted the job at age 23.
Part of the risks/drawbacks:
Ultra hazardous working conditions.....probable injuries.....possible death.....shortened lifespan.....missed birthdays/holidays with family.....long hours.
Part of the rewards:
Excellent job security.....immense self satisfaction from job.....fair salary....good benefits, INCLUDING a defined benefit pension plan.
So you are correct.....I did know the risks and subsequent rewards when I signed up. Again.....I have honored my end of the deal.....will you honor your end?
<< <i>When the politicians and unions work together to make the deal, we the people had no say in the deal to honor. There's your discontent, politely. >>
Completely incorrect. You had not 1, but actually 2 "says" in the deal. The 1st "say" was when you elected that politician to represent you. Thats enough in itself. But you had a 2nd "say" in the deal when you agreed to pay property taxes in the city in which you live. You surely want my service, but you dont want to pay for it. Is that what im to understand?
No point in further pointing out the flaw in your objectives.
<< <i>No point in further pointing out the flaw in your objectives. >>
I present no flaws nor objectives. I present facts. I was contracted to do a job for "X" compensation & benefits. I agreed to the terms. Now....much later in the game you wish to redefine those original terms. Sorry...not gonna happen. In legal circles, you are talking about theft of services.
Go get a blown car motor rebuilt for $3500 and then when its done, and you have your car back....stop payment on the check you wrote because you "re-thought" the agreement you originally made. This is the same concept you condone with me? Good luck pal.....see you in court.....where my pension is guaranteed by the Illinois state constitution by the way.
<< <i>I don't want your services. I pay taxes for them, I do not expect an additional bill for covering your pension mishandlings. I pay the insurance game to cover my loss for not wanting to double pay for your 20 year career and 45 year 80% salary retirement plan.
No point in further pointing out the flaw in your objectives. >>
20 years at 80%? Ahhhhhh, now i see why you talk the way you do....you are ignorant on the material. We have a 30 years of service with 75% benefit. Your tax bill has ALWAYS supplemented the municipal pensions...its not some new concept. You pay for my service today AND my retirement tomorrow. In return, I voluntarily risk my life to save your kid's life in the event you experience a fire. Thats the deal....got it?
<< <i>I worked for the state for years Phil. I say it like I know it. >>
Ok, so then why do you think its fair....or even acceptable to reduce or eliminate pensions for those who have paid into the system for decades with the understanding that they have enough of a retirement fund?
As you know, im NOT eligible to receive a dime of social security because of my municipal pension. Thats another thing I was well aware of when I signed on to this job. I have done what was asked of me both financially (9.125% of every check I ever earned has been deducted and placed in my pension fund) as well as perform my duties to the fullest extent of my abilities.
And now.....in midstream....you want the terms changed????
Bringing the thread back on topic. Based upon the ops criteria
<< <i>It's not money you want to spend. You just want to put it in a safe place. You don't want high risk. Your main concern is safety, and to keep it out of the hands of those who can rob you. You want to avoid the Bernie Madoff's of the world. >>
here is what I would do.
A.) Don't give it to someone else to manage. If you want to avoid the Madoff's of the world completely, their is only one way. Do it yourself.
B.) My main concern is safety of principal (per OP) and I don't want high risk. So equities are out. I also want to keep it out of the hands of those who can rob me (including govt). So assuming no impending apocalypse or complete govt meltdown, I would invest the money per below.
1.) 1/3 in high grade corporate bonds. These are taxable, but their after tax yields are historically higher then high grade municipals or govt securities.
2.) 1/3 in high grade essential service revenue municipal bonds. By this I mean bonds that are backed by essential municipal services. Water, Sewer, Electric, Transportation. This also helps protect against rising tax rates as municipals are federal tax free. They are also state/city/local tax free depending on if the bonds are in the municipality you live in (their are always exceptions to the rule).
3.) 1/3 in precious metals. Historically have been a pretty good hedge against inflation.
Since all my debt obligations are paid, and assuming I still have a job of some sorts, I feel this would be my best option of protecting my principal over the long haul while also generating a decent (not great) return on my extra lump sum.
<< <i>So it really is no different than social security. Not enough money to fund the retiring baby-boomers. >>
Can you imagine if SS promised you 75% of your working wage upon retirement. I have no problem with pension plans offering such a generous benefit as long the employee share and any employer match can cover the payout. To expect the taxpayers to make up the difference is ludicrous. Civil servants should have to plan for retirement with 401Ks and IRAs just like the rest of us.
MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Personally if I were you I'd be pissed also. But, that's not going to change how it's gonna to go down. Suck it up and plan your escape from the system at your terms. Prepare for the day. Winter is coming.............MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
What does that mean? It means that every time you "take profits" you are losing a chunk of the real asset to taxes. In an inflationary environment, those chunks paid out as taxes reduce the size of your real-life assets. The dollar amount goes up, and the amount of the physical investment gets smaller.
You have to be one heckuva trader to overcome a tax bite and still maintain your real capital. Everyone can't do it, because 50% of every trade involves a losing side. That's why leverage becomes so hyped as things progress - after a score or two on leverage, you begin to think you are invincible. (You aren't.)
Be careful of making a trading account out of any money in an inflationary environment. Of course, if you have losses they will mitigate and offset some gains but inflation changes everything with respect to "gains".
Keep a handle on the inflation numbers, and plan accordingly.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>Gecko when the system implodes and it will one day, I personally think it would be immoral for them not to pay you back every cent you personally put into the plan. That maybe the only think you get. After that I think it will be real messy and folks will get kicked to the curb with either no benefits or drastically reduced benefits at best. It's hard to imagine a scenario in which this won't happen. Prepare for it. Is it fair? No it isn't. It sucks. However having it suck won't change a thing. Your gig and many others are unsustainable and when the bodies start hitting the floor you guys will be the first to taste cement.
Personally if I were you I'd be pissed also. But, that's not going to change how it's gonna to go down. Suck it up and plan your escape from the system at your terms. Prepare for the day. Winter is coming.............MJ >>
As a municipal employee myself, Im fine with that. Give me back everything that I paid into it and I'll dump it into my 457b. Let me keep the 11% per week and I'll invest it on my own.
When I got hired 10 years ago everyone was encouraged to take out a retirement plan on their own.
I guess the writing has been on the wall for some time now.
<< <i>
Ok, so then why do you think its fair....or even acceptable to reduce or eliminate pensions for those who have paid into the system for decades with the understanding that they have enough of a retirement fund?
>>
No easy solution here. Why is it fair that Illinois raise my taxes to pay for state work pensions? Why don't our goophy politicians encourage job growth and industrial development. If I were a state or gov worker, I'd go after the politicians, not the tax payers. We don't get anything out of funding your retirements (by the way, I'm in the ILL SURS pension program, so I have an interest in getting as much of my pension as I can).
-$100K for more land.
-$100K in PM's. I would shop for deals. Lowest premiums rule.
-$75K to use to play a little in the stock market.