2 million taxable account colleague claims?

[finalpsychyear]

So upon discussion of FIRE with a collegue who is in a surgical subspecialty mid 30's (single 5 years attending) he was saying that he has already accumulated this amount post tax and has only recently dumped it into the market and he considers himself already in the fat fire range (100k/yr post tax) and he plans on going part time in the next 2-3 years. I tried to convince him that he needs 25x (2.5m) minimum so he is actually quite a bit short but he claims since his amount is post tax money in a brokerage account that he needs less than that and believes what he has accomplished to be more difficult. Just trying to figure out if there is merit to what he is saying?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[thumbz]

I mean, if he truly only "just recently" dumped it into the market then for 5 years he was saving $400k post tax into the account or he was already independently wealthy. Maybe he makes $750k/yr gross and lives like a resident.

Also, I wouldn't call 2 million "actually quite a bit short" of 2.5 million if he truly put away 2 million in 5 years. In 2-3 year he will be at 3.2 million if he continues his current savings rate.

 

[dpmd]

If dude has 2 mil taxable.investments plus his retirement accounts he is fine to consider himself having achieved FI and can RE is he wants or go part time. He is right that if it is post tax money he doesn't need as much as he would if it were subject to tax too. Why are you ****ting on his success?

 

[finalpsychyear]

If dude has 2 mil taxable.investments plus his retirement accounts he is fine to consider himself having achieved FI and can RE is he wants or go part time. He is right that if it is post tax money he doesn't need as much as he would if it were subject to tax too. Why are you ****ting on his success?

Guy is a D-bag who goes out of his way to insert himself whenever other colleagues are talking about FIRE. I don't' know anything about his retirement accounts If i recall he doesn't believe in them as he wants the money available now so i'm assuming he has minimal. He has made it a point to humble brag that he is done saving and may only work 5 more years part time only to allow what he just invested to get 5 years of returns

 

[dpmd]

Guy is a D-bag who goes out of his way to insert himself whenever other colleagues are talking about FIRE. I don't' know anything about his retirement accounts If i recall he doesn't believe in them as he wants the money available now so i'm assuming he has minimal. He has made it a point to humble brag that he is done saving and may only work 5 more years part time only to allow what he just invested to get 5 years of returns

Ok, he's a jerk. Trying to piss on his achievement won't fix that.

 

[thumbz]

Well and keep in mind it's easy to talk a big game when no one can confirm

I don't know if you guys know this but I have 28 million dollars in a taxable account that I saved over the last 18 minutes. So I'm FIRE'd too

 

[dpmd]

Well and keep in mind it's easy to talk a big game when no one can confirm

I don't know if you guys know this but I have 28 million dollars in a taxable account that I saved over the last 18 minutes. So I'm FIRE'd too

What does it matter if it is true or a lie? Say good for you and turn back to the person you were speaking to before he butted in.

 

[finalpsychyear]

Well and keep in mind it's easy to talk a big game when no one can confirm

I don't know if you guys know this but I have 28 million dollars in a taxable account that I saved over the last 18 minutes. So I'm FIRE'd too

Another coworker confirmed he pulls up his brokerage account daily so the amount has been confirmed.

No one is pissing on anyone's achievements. I still don't think 2 million is 2.5 million and all the data via the 4% rule used that number and don't assume taxes so technically the 2.5 million is post tax money unless i am mistaken.

 

[Mman]

Another coworker confirmed he pulls up his brokerage account daily so the amount has been confirmed.

No one is pissing on anyone's achievements. I still don't think 2 million is 2.5 million and all the data via the 4% rule used that number and don't assume taxes so technically the 2.5 million is post tax money unless i am mistaken.

The question you are meaning to ask is what post-tax income does he need to retire on and what sum of money does he require to support that indefinitely (via a sustainable withdrawal rate)?

The fact that he is using money in a taxable account means it definitely requires less in withdrawals than something like a pretax 401K would for someone using that as a calculation. Why? Because the vast majority of his $2M is probably just post-tax principal that was placed into the account and a relatively small amount would be capital gains subject to tax. Pretend right now that $1.5M is principal and $500K would be long term capital gains. That means that overall only 25% of his withdrawals going forward would be subject to tax and that tax rate would be long term capital gains. If he withdrew 100K per year, only 25K of that would be considered income and the long term capital gains rate at that level of income is 0%. So he would owe no federal tax at all on those withdrawals. Although if he is still working part time, then his income will be higher and that 25K of capital gains would now start to get taxed.

But as you point out, if you want to live on 100K a year (especially for decades) a 5% SWR is not really an ideal situation. Something like 30x would be a lot more likely to last.

But it really boils down to how much post tax income somebody is planning on using and then you can back calculate the withdrawals you would need from various types of accounts and their differing tax rates to figure out how you get there. And then once you figure out how much pretax withdrawal you need per year then you can pull out your desired multiplier 25x or 30x or whatever) to determine how big of a number you need to actually retire.

For me personally, the taxes are extremely complicated when trying to plan FIRE. I will have money in 401K, Roth IRA, pension (which can then be rolled into traditional IRA), taxable accounts, 529s for kids, etc. It essentially isn't even worth doing precise calculations until I get closer. For example I have a hard time even guesstimating what the tax rate will be on my taxable account because it is heavily dependent on future returns to determine what percentage of the total account value is principal vs capital gains. And then you gotta figure out where you will be taking money from in any given year to figure out what your total tax bill will end up being. So I think it is useful to be aware of the tax consequences for different types of accounts, but then once you get close to actually retiring you can sit down and run some spreadsheets with actual account values and expected spending needs.

 

[finalpsychyear]

The question you are meaning to ask is what post-tax income does he need to retire on and what sum of money does he require to support that indefinitely (via a sustainable withdrawal rate)?

The fact that he is using money in a taxable account means it definitely requires less in withdrawals than something like a pretax 401K would for someone using that as a calculation. Why? Because the vast majority of his $2M is probably just post-tax principal that was placed into the account and a relatively small amount would be capital gains subject to tax. Pretend right now that $1.5M is principal and $500K would be long term capital gains. That means that overall only 25% of his withdrawals going forward would be subject to tax and that tax rate would be long term capital gains. If he withdrew 100K per year, only 25K of that would be considered income and the long term capital gains rate at that level of income is 0%. So he would owe no federal tax at all on those withdrawals. Although if he is still working part time, then his income will be higher and that 25K of capital gains would now start to get taxed.

But as you point out, if you want to live on 100K a year (especially for decades) a 5% SWR is not really an ideal situation. Something like 30x would be a lot more likely to last.

But it really boils down to how much post tax income somebody is planning on using and then you can back calculate the withdrawals you would need from various types of accounts and their differing tax rates to figure out how you get there. And then once you figure out how much pretax withdrawal you need per year then you can pull out your desired multiplier 25x or 30x or whatever) to determine how big of a number you need to actually retire.

For me personally, the taxes are extremely complicated when trying to plan FIRE. I will have money in 401K, Roth IRA, pension (which can then be rolled into traditional IRA), taxable accounts, 529s for kids, etc. It essentially isn't even worth doing precise calculations until I get closer. For example I have a hard time even guesstimating what the tax rate will be on my taxable account because it is heavily dependent on future returns to determine what percentage of the total account value is principal vs capital gains. And then you gotta figure out where you will be taking money from in any given year to figure out what your total tax bill will end up being. So I think it is useful to be aware of the tax consequences for different types of accounts, but then once you get close to actually retiring you can sit down and run some spreadsheets with actual account values and expected spending needs.

Your right it is very complicated. I being foolish along with cautious simply plan to shoot for 25x in a taxable account and also as separate 20x in a pre tax (401k plus cash balance). The roth's are going to be passed down to a another generation so forget about those imo. Also let us not forget dividend income some people can get 30-50k a year on dividends which i believe is also taxed at long term cap gains.

 

[finalpsychyear]

The question you are meaning to ask is what post-tax income does he need to retire on and what sum of money does he require to support that indefinitely (via a sustainable withdrawal rate)?

The fact that he is using money in a taxable account means it definitely requires less in withdrawals than something like a pretax 401K would for someone using that as a calculation. Why? Because the vast majority of his $2M is probably just post-tax principal that was placed into the account and a relatively small amount would be capital gains subject to tax. Pretend right now that $1.5M is principal and $500K would be long term capital gains. That means that overall only 25% of his withdrawals going forward would be subject to tax and that tax rate would be long term capital gains. If he withdrew 100K per year, only 25K of that would be considered income and the long term capital gains rate at that level of income is 0%. So he would owe no federal tax at all on those withdrawals. Although if he is still working part time, then his income will be higher and that 25K of capital gains would now start to get taxed.

But as you point out, if you want to live on 100K a year (especially for decades) a 5% SWR is not really an ideal situation. Something like 30x would be a lot more likely to last.

But it really boils down to how much post tax income somebody is planning on using and then you can back calculate the withdrawals you would need from various types of accounts and their differing tax rates to figure out how you get there. And then once you figure out how much pretax withdrawal you need per year then you can pull out your desired multiplier 25x or 30x or whatever) to determine how big of a number you need to actually retire.

For me personally, the taxes are extremely complicated when trying to plan FIRE. I will have money in 401K, Roth IRA, pension (which can then be rolled into traditional IRA), taxable accounts, 529s for kids, etc. It essentially isn't even worth doing precise calculations until I get closer. For example I have a hard time even guesstimating what the tax rate will be on my taxable account because it is heavily dependent on future returns to determine what percentage of the total account value is principal vs capital gains. And then you gotta figure out where you will be taking money from in any given year to figure out what your total tax bill will end up being. So I think it is useful to be aware of the tax consequences for different types of accounts, but then once you get close to actually retiring you can sit down and run some spreadsheets with actual account values and expected spending needs.

Humor me. Why isn't there more of a push for investing in high dividend companies that pay 5-10% assuming the dividend stays.. ex: exxon?
One could easily invest 1m and get an avg of 5% dividend payout or 50k yearly for life more than likely on top of growth of those individual stocks?

 

[Mman]

Humor me. Why isn't there more of a push for investing in high dividend companies that pay 5-10% assuming the dividend stays.. ex: exxon?
One could easily invest 1m and get an avg of 5% dividend payout or 50k yearly for life more than likely on top of growth of those individual stocks?

because there is essentially no good evidence that dividend stocks have a higher total return than non dividend paying stocks which is the only thing that matters to you as investor. And when you start getting into something like Exxon, the dividend is high precisely because people expect it to drop in the future. If you are counting on Exxon to yield 5% dividend for the next 50 years well I have an oil well to sell you. It's more likely the company ceases to continue operations over that time frame than it is to continue paying a fat dividend for that entire time.

Also from a retirement point of view, dividend paying stocks are worse from a tax point of view than non dividend paying stocks if held in a taxable account. Why? Because you have to pay tax on that dividend every year whether you need it or not as opposed to capital gains that can be taken when and how they are most convenient to you.

 

[TraderDoc]

Humor me. Why isn't there more of a push for investing in high dividend companies that pay 5-10% assuming the dividend stays.. ex: exxon?
One could easily invest 1m and get an avg of 5% dividend payout or 50k yearly for life more than likely on top of growth of those individual stocks?

I think $XOM is a good buy at these price levels for a safe investment. Energy as a sector should come back, Exxon should have nice cash flow as COVID-19 gets handled in the next 6-12 months. Juicy dividend is definitely attractive. But this isn't a stock I think will do well in the next 5-10 years IMO as the world transitions to alternative clean energy.

But personally I only invest in companies that will change the way we live, the way we work, the way we play. Companies that show consistently sound CAGR/growing sales and revenue and demonstrate potential to be true market leaders. I'm not the typical safe investor because I don't think companies like $T / $XOM etc. despite great dividends, they simply don't provide true life changing returns. I'm also in my early 30s so time is on my side.

But if I was in my 50s/nearing retirement, the high paying dividend companies are sound investments.

 

[cpants]

Guy is a D-bag who goes out of his way to insert himself whenever other colleagues are talking about FIRE. I don't' know anything about his retirement accounts If i recall he doesn't believe in them as he wants the money available now so i'm assuming he has minimal. He has made it a point to humble brag that he is done saving and may only work 5 more years part time only to allow what he just invested to get 5 years of returns

I wouldn't put it in retirement accounts either if I was going to retire at 40. Not touchable in most of them until closer to "retirement age". 2.5M to draw 100k/year is not enough.

 

[Mad Jack]

He's also going to be working part time and still working for another couple of years. He will be fine.

 

[Mad Jack]

I wouldn't put it in retirement accounts either if I was going to retire at 40. Not touchable in most of them until closer to "retirement age". 2.5M to draw 100k/year is not enough.

This isn't necessarily true. You can withdraw using substantially equal periodic payments without a penalty at any age.

 

[Splenda88]

He's also going to be working part time and still working for another couple of years. He will be fine.

He will be more than fine. If he has accumulated 2 mil in 5 years in NW, my guess is he will be making more than what FM/IM/psych/peds docs make
working part time.

That is one of the good things about medicine. You can semi retire in your early 40s if you were a traditional student. You can make 6-figure salary working only 2 days/wk in most specialties.

 

[The White Coat Investor]

So upon discussion of FIRE with a collegue who is in a surgical subspecialty mid 30's (single 5 years attending) he was saying that he has already accumulated this amount post tax and has only recently dumped it into the market and he considers himself already in the fat fire range (100k/yr post tax) and he plans on going part time in the next 2-3 years. I tried to convince him that he needs 25x (2.5m) minimum so he is actually quite a bit short but he claims since his amount is post tax money in a brokerage account that he needs less than that and believes what he has accomplished to be more difficult. Just trying to figure out if there is merit to what he is saying?

Sounds like he can certainly afford to go part-time in 2-3 years if he wants. But I wouldn't necessarily skip out on retirement accounts to invest in taxable. More FIRE interested docs are doing both in order to get their savings rate up high enough to achieve the sort of thing this doc has done.

 

[Financial Advisor Justin]

If the money is in a "brokerage account" also known as a taxable account they will still be required to pay capital gains tax on any growth

 

[Mman]

If the money is in a "brokerage account" also known as a taxable account they will still be required to pay capital gains tax on any growth

although currently for married filing jointly, if your taxable income is less than $80,800 per year the long term capital gains rate is 0%. If you are living modestly enough and a good chunk of that taxable account is principal and not capital gains it is not too hard to stay in that 0% bracket.

 

[igap]

So upon discussion of FIRE with a collegue who is in a surgical subspecialty mid 30's (single 5 years attending) he was saying that he has already accumulated this amount post tax and has only recently dumped it into the market and he considers himself already in the fat fire range (100k/yr post tax) and he plans on going part time in the next 2-3 years. I tried to convince him that he needs 25x (2.5m) minimum so he is actually quite a bit short but he claims since his amount is post tax money in a brokerage account that he needs less than that and believes what he has accomplished to be more difficult. Just trying to figure out if there is merit to what he is saying?

Welp, you sound kind of jelly. And it's not a good look!

But I'd say a guy in his mid-30s, single, no kids, with 2M in a taxable brokerage, is in pretty solid shape. I'm gonna make a few assumptions here. He is living a reasonable lifestyle and is fairly savvy with his cash. He probably does not have many major expenses at this point in his life. He is in good health. He earns 600k+ per year.

Even if this guy goes part time, he is going to earn more than most non-specialists. His portfolio, on average, will double every 7-10 years without any other contributions if it is constructed with low-mod risk. By the time he is 55, his portfolio will be 10 Mill.

Most of the "FIRE" types I meet are not planning on doing nothing for the rest of their lives. Most just want to get to the point where they can still work but just do it at an enjoyable pace. This guy could probably still work part time, live a nice lifestyle, and be happy doing that all the while his investments are compounding.

Once you have accumulated a couple milli, and invest it properly, compounding will take care of the rest. This guy's portfolio is going to compound its way to 8 figgies without him doing anything.

 

[finalpsychyear]

Welp, you sound kind of jelly. And it's not a good look!

But I'd say a guy in his mid-30s, single, no kids, with 2M in a taxable brokerage, is in pretty solid shape. I'm gonna make a few assumptions here. He is living a reasonable lifestyle and is fairly savvy with his cash. He probably does not have many major expenses at this point in his life. He is in good health. He earns 600k+ per year.

Even if this guy goes part time, he is going to earn more than most non-specialists. His portfolio, on average, will double every 7-10 years without any other contributions if it is constructed with low-mod risk. By the time he is 55, his portfolio will be 10 Mill.

Most of the "FIRE" types I meet are not planning on doing nothing for the rest of their lives. Most just want to get to the point where they can still work but just do it at an enjoyable pace. This guy could probably still work part time, live a nice lifestyle, and be happy doing that all the while his investments are compounding.

Once you have accumulated a couple milli, and invest it properly, compounding will take care of the rest. This guy's portfolio is going to compound its way to 8 figgies without him doing anything.

Not jelly. I just thought 2.5m was the minimum or 25x regardless if it was taxable vs 401k. This would be fine if the guy was 65 yo and ready for a 20-25 year retirement.

If i remember correctly Mman quoted 30-33x being far safer especially for someone retiring at 40 years old.

Being risk averse myself even if i someday achieve the 25x amount I would probably go 5-7 additional years PT just to make sure the market doesn't have a massive correction as soon as I retire and let it grow untouched for 5 additional years. Only then would i even think about withdrawing.

 

[porijendel]

I think you should ask a similar question to more knowledgeable people in this field, namely accountants. I've always hated counting bills, taxes, and so on. Therefore, when I started earning a lot of money with the help of my investments and ingenious plans, I started using programs that allow you to calculate your salary with taxes. I also recently opened my own coffee business and bought software that automatically calculates employee salaries based on the company's budget. So I have no idea what your old man meant.

 

[Mman]

I recently read an article about QuickBooks and Freshbooks, what should I choose for my business?

LOL WTF???

Your first post ever on the forum is asking about business accounting software in a finance subforum in a thread about FIRE? You didn't have any questions about people's favorite ballpoint pen to sign charts with?

 

[Monocles]

I just thought 2.5m was the minimum

I've never heard of this but in a community of physicians I suppose it's not unreasonable as most would want to maintain a certain standard of living above the median populace. My personal FIRE goal is a smidge lower but perhaps it should be 2.5m given the way inflation is going...

 

[Mman]

My personal FIRE goal is a smidge lower but perhaps it should be 2.5m given the way inflation is going...

FIRE planning should always have a withdrawal rate that adjusts up every year with inflation. Historically people go with 4% based off Trinity study (amongst others). Personally I use 3% for planning purposes. That both accounts for possible lower returns going forward but also possible higher inflation going forward. But 4% withdrawal rate held up fine in previous inflationary periods in the US.

 

[finalpsychyear]

FIRE planning should always have a withdrawal rate that adjusts up every year with inflation. Historically people go with 4% based off Trinity study (amongst others). Personally I use 3% for planning purposes. That both accounts for possible lower returns going forward but also possible higher inflation going forward. But 4% withdrawal rate held up fine in previous inflationary periods in the US.

Just so I am clear does the 3-4% withdrawal assume that the very first year you start withdrawing the market crashes 2008/2020 style and you still withdraw without any hiccups. I have peeps saying better to have a few years worth of living expenses in a separate account so you don't tap into a portfolio that potentially lost 50% its value. Not sure that comes up in discussions but it makes sense to me to have some wiggle room.

 

[Mman]

Just so I am clear does the 3-4% withdrawal assume that the very first year you start withdrawing the market crashes 2008/2020 style and you still withdraw without any hiccups. I have peeps saying better to have a few years worth of living expenses in a separate account so you don't tap into a portfolio that potentially lost 50% its value. Not sure that comes up in discussions but it makes sense to me to have some wiggle room.

the 4% number historically includes every possible bad outcome and it was successful something like >95% of the time. Success defined as supporting that withdrawal rate and increasing with inflation every year for at least 30 years.

Since I plan to be retired for longer than 30 years and am planning for worse future conditions than past, that is why I use 3% as my personal planning number. It means I need to save up 33x of annual expenses instead of 25x, but I'm OK with that. Provides added margin of safety to me.


There are lots of other withdrawal strategies. I kinda like the Bogleheads Variable Withdrawal Rate. You can look it up on their wiki. Short explanation is that it smoothes out your monthly allowable spend based on recent portfolio performance, but does so over 12 months (or you could even do 24) so if the market crashes your monthly spending only slowly ramps down and when the market skyrockets you don't start spending it all at once.

 

[Splenda88]

Just so I am clear does the 3-4% withdrawal assume that the very first year you start withdrawing the market crashes 2008/2020 style and you still withdraw without any hiccups. I have peeps saying better to have a few years worth of living expenses in a separate account so you don't tap into a portfolio that potentially lost 50% its value. Not sure that comes up in discussions but it makes sense to me to have some wiggle room.

Ideally 2+ years IMO.

 

[finalpsychyear]

I guess if you also have some yearly dividends along with extra cash it would be great to have several years of reserve before tapping your nest egg.
Example : need 70k for expenses at retirement, have dividends giving 35k yearly and a separate account to sorta make up the difference. This is all overkill i am sure but i like the idea of this cushion for even 5 years with the dividends if you just happen to pick a 2008 year to retire in even though the math still works without it.

 

[Mad Jack]

Don't ever withdraw set amounts on taxable accounts like this. You should be withdrawing 4%, with some lean years and some less so. If you withdraw flat amounts, a market dip can prove devastating if it timed wrong. Say the market drops 50% and he withdraws 100k in the following year- he just lost 10% of his net worth. That will reduce his future retirement years substantially.

 

[Mad Jack]

As to the advantages of post-tax, you pay capital gains rates only. If you are pulling dividends you can pay even less than capital gains rates. There are even lower tax strategies than these, but they can be a bit challenging to implement

 

[finalpsychyear]

6.2% inflation is insanity and hopefully an anomaly but if there is more stimulus money then we are heading for more.

 

[Monocles]

6.2% inflation is insanity and hopefully an anomaly but if there is more stimulus money then we are heading for more.

Right? All the talk of "inflation being transitory"... whether or not it's factually true, if the average american THINKS it is and adjusts spending habits ("if I don't buy this now it'll just get more expensive later") then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[finalpsychyear]

Right? All the talk of "inflation being transitory"... whether or not it's factually true, if the average american THINKS it is and adjusts spending habits ("if I don't buy this now it'll just get more expensive later") then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The scary thing is i think this amount is not even the true rate. I was reading most goods are marked up 10-20% and most of what i have read saying that even this number is manipulated. The point is if inflation is at least this and we continue for the next several years index funds aren't going to secure FIRE for anyone.

 

[AD04]

The scary thing is i think this amount is not even the true rate.

See this:

Alternate Inflation Charts

www.shadowstats.com

The elites want higher inflation as there has to be a way to "pay off" the debt. And the best way is to inflate it away instead of jacking up tax rates for everyone.

The point is if inflation is at least this and we continue for the next several years index funds aren't going to secure FIRE for anyone.

Inflation depends on your lifestyle. For someone who wants to live with parents and play video games and eat pizza, inflation is minimal. Inflation is highest for those who want to acquire assets.

 

[finalpsychyear]

See this:

Alternate Inflation Charts

www.shadowstats.com

The elites want higher inflation as there has to be a way to "pay off" the debt. And the best way is to inflate it away instead of jacking up tax rates for everyone.



Inflation depends on your lifestyle. For someone who wants to live with parents and play video games and eat pizza, inflation is minimal. Inflation is highest for those who want to acquire assets.

This is likely much more accurate and probably the reality for the next few years. Goodbye 4% rule for now

 

[thesauce]

Inflation is annoying, but the market, real estate, and most assets will be increasing in price along with increased inflation. Not that inflation is a good thing, but it probably doesn’t change the outcome very much.

 

[finalpsychyear]

Inflation is annoying, but the market, real estate, and most assets will be increasing in price along with increased inflation. Not that inflation is a good thing, but it probably doesn’t change the outcome very much.

That is good to hear.

 

[Monocles]

Inflation depends on your lifestyle. For someone who wants to live with parents and play video games and eat pizza, inflation is minimal. Inflation is highest for those who want to acquire assets.

As an aside I am very glad that video games have remained $60 for new releases throughout the past two decades... not that I pay full price anyway (<$20 bargins baby!)

 

[finalpsychyear]

As an aside I am very glad that video games have remained $60 for new releases throughout the past two decades... not that I pay full price anyway (<$20 bargins baby!)

Gaming as an attending is one of the most cost effective hobbies even if you pay full price. along with some cognitive benefits per research provided you can do it in moderation.

 

[Monocles]

Gaming as an attending is one of the most cost effective hobbies even if you pay full price. along with some cognitive benefits per research provided you can do it in moderation.

I've completed about 25 titles this year and between the public library, steam sharing, steep discounts, and xbox game pass, I don't think I've spent more than $150... this is probably my primary hobby lol.

 

[FutureInternist]

As an aside I am very glad that video games have remained $60 for new releases throughout the past two decades... not that I pay full price anyway (<$20 bargins baby!)

Bought a PS 3 a loooonng time ago.
Kid 4 years ago.
NO games until I got COVID in Nov of last year.. 😏
But… wouldn’t have it any other way

 

[Monocles]

Bought a PS 3 a loooonng time ago.
Kid 4 years ago.
NO games until I got COVID in Nov of last year.. 😏
But… wouldn’t have it any other way

Ugh I can't imagine how little free time I'll have once we have kids... can't wait for retirement!

 

[FutureInternist]

Ugh I can't imagine how little free time I'll have once we have kids... can't wait for retirement!

Ha.. well we waited 7 years for ours so definitely OK with not playing KillZone 😏.

But for sure, no weekend trips to NY, LV, Chicago etc

 

[ER BlueBlood]

6.2% inflation is insanity and hopefully an anomaly but if there is more stimulus money then we are heading for more.

Oh it’s coming my friend, more money dumps and more inflation

 

[thesauce]

Yep. This administration doesn’t think money is real

 

[Splenda88]

Yep. This administration doesn’t think money is real

The past 3 and this administration...

 

[ER BlueBlood]

Inflation is annoying, but the market, real estate, and most assets will be increasing in price along with increased inflation. Not that inflation is a good thing, but it probably doesn’t change the outcome very much.

Commodities are the best place to be during an inflation run. A lot of other sectors could get burned as inflation increases their cost of goods and the discount rate on their valuations increases, reducing their NPV