Also, a blended 401k retirement fund like that is going to be in mostly equities with a retirement track for 2040.
You’re returns are going to mirror the S&P for a while until they slowly move into bonds and money markets as the fund approaches 2040.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Also, a blended 401k retirement fund like that is going to be in mostly equities at this point with a retirement track for 2040.
Your returns are going to mirror the S&P for a while until they slowly move into bonds and money markets as the fund approaches 2040.[/quote]
Edits: added some words for clarity and fixed a your
[quote]Christine wrote:
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]BCFlynn wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
However, for those of us who despise him
[/quote]
LOL. Why do I get the feeling that this made up the majority of the votes against alone?[/quote]
Because it is the same reason most of the votes against bush in 2004 went to Kerry, who is basically Mitt lite, and yet no one on the left had a problem attacking romney for his money. [/quote]
I would whole heartedly disagree with calling Kerry Mitt-Lite. Romney, though born in privledge, earned his money. Kerry married his. Mitt has run for President the last 6 years, Kerry had been running since Yale. As one of his constituents, I can’t think of one piece of legislation with his name on it. He did go to Vietnam. I’ll give him a ton of credit for that. I don’t care whether his purple hearts are in question or not, the guy was there.
[/quote]
I’m in MA as well.
I agree with everything you said, lol.
I was just making a point that the left hated Romney’s money, when they ran money against Bush in 2004. OH and they still hate Bush, so acting like it is some major source of controversy or news that people hate Obama is silly.
[/quote]
See Beans, this is where I think you are in the bubble. Nobody that I personally know (and I know a LOT of democrats) were bitching that Romney has money. I am in DC and me and most of my friends are pretty well off, and largely lean Democrat, and not once has anybody said that Romney being rich is a bad thing. Romney did not lose this election because he is rich, he lost because he is a rich dude THAT IS COMPLETELY OUT OF TOUCH WITH MIDDLE AMERICA. His speeches made me squirm when he tried to appeal to middle america (biscuits and gravy, trees the right height, etc.). And the fact that the tea party pushed him so hard to the right in the primaries, only to require him to sprint to the middle during the election in order to capture the independent vote, made people understandably question where he actually stood on the issues.
[/quote]
Tis true.
My father, who was lucky enough to fall into a golden parachute, lamented that the republicans gave him no choice but to vote along party lines. He was a fantastic negotiator and did very well. He retired several times but was always brought back because he was good at what he did, when I was young, I remember him telling me never to vote along party lines but to choose each person for what they stood for. He was the person that every liked, it didn’t matter who you were or where you came from. He was the hardest worker I have ever known. Didn’t take a dime from his parents. He sold newspapers on the corners and worked for everything that he ever got. He voted for Reagan and he hated what became of the republican party.
Mostly, he hated that the republican party gave him no choice than to vote democrat.
I know this is only ancedoteal, but there are a lot of us out here who work and pay taxes and are turned off by the GOP.
[/quote]
Again, my “bubble” being criticized with… Other people’s bubbles?
I don’t get it.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Granted Todd Akin, Roger Rivard and others said some dumb shit but I don’t think that had any influence on the Romney campaign. What percentage of the population would’ve even heard about it?[/quote]
LOL
Seriously? With the liberal arm of the media on the job, who didn’t hear about it?[/quote]
Dude do you even know what percentage of Americans even bother to vote? They don’t have compulsory voting like us. Most the population has never even heard of Todd Akin and it’s only the hardcore leftists who seek out these comments and publish them in hard left publications where the readership would vote for Obama no matter what.[/quote]
Something like 68%, no?[/quote]
Actually no, this federal election it was 57.5% from my sources. A national disgrace. I’d look up a quote from Plato on the duty of citizen participation in the political process if I had the time and inclination.
VT Balla,
Are you a government shill ? I don’t know ONE SINGLE PERSON who is making more $$$ than in 2008. You have to be a Union goon, or someone affiliated with government whoredom.
Also, the unemployment rate here is at least 20% realistically. If you count the number of peeps underemployed and stopped looking for work, it’s really that bad.
Please enlighten us, this oughta be rich.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]BCFlynn wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
However, for those of us who despise him
[/quote]
LOL. Why do I get the feeling that this made up the majority of the votes against alone?[/quote]
Because it is the same reason most of the votes against bush in 2004 went to Kerry, who is basically Mitt lite, and yet no one on the left had a problem attacking romney for his money. [/quote]
I would whole heartedly disagree with calling Kerry Mitt-Lite. Romney, though born in privledge, earned his money. Kerry married his. Mitt has run for President the last 6 years, Kerry had been running since Yale. As one of his constituents, I can’t think of one piece of legislation with his name on it. He did go to Vietnam. I’ll give him a ton of credit for that. I don’t care whether his purple hearts are in question or not, the guy was there.
[/quote]
I’m in MA as well.
I agree with everything you said, lol.
I was just making a point that the left hated Romney’s money, when they ran money against Bush in 2004. OH and they still hate Bush, so acting like it is some major source of controversy or news that people hate Obama is silly.
[/quote]
See Beans, this is where I think you are in the bubble. Nobody that I personally know (and I know a LOT of democrats) were bitching that Romney has money. I am in DC and me and most of my friends are pretty well off, and largely lean Democrat, and not once has anybody said that Romney being rich is a bad thing. Romney did not lose this election because he is rich, he lost because he is a rich dude THAT IS COMPLETELY OUT OF TOUCH WITH MIDDLE AMERICA. His speeches made me squirm when he tried to appeal to middle america (biscuits and gravy, trees the right height, etc.). And the fact that the tea party pushed him so hard to the right in the primaries, only to require him to sprint to the middle during the election in order to capture the independent vote, made people understandably question where he actually stood on the issues.
[/quote]
Tis true.
My father, who was lucky enough to fall into a golden parachute, lamented that the republicans gave him no choice but to vote along party lines. He was a fantastic negotiator and did very well. He retired several times but was always brought back because he was good at what he did, when I was young, I remember him telling me never to vote along party lines but to choose each person for what they stood for. He was the person that every liked, it didn’t matter who you were or where you came from. He was the hardest worker I have ever known. Didn’t take a dime from his parents. He sold newspapers on the corners and worked for everything that he ever got. He voted for Reagan and he hated what became of the republican party.
Mostly, he hated that the republican party gave him no choice than to vote democrat.
I know this is only ancedoteal, but there are a lot of us out here who work and pay taxes and are turned off by the GOP.
[/quote]
Again, my “bubble” being criticized with… Other people’s bubbles?
I don’t get it.[/quote]
Well, my bubble is filled with hard working people who happened to make it. Some lean right, some lean left. But none of them hate on those who have money because they are all dining with good wines (really good) and plying golf on the best courses.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
A 25% increase in pay is going to increase your marginal tax rate enough to zero out the FICA reduction if not be greater than the 2% reduction.
Well to be fair if you were making less than 50k-ish to begin with, then yeah your total percentage would have net dropped.
So it depends on where you increased 25% from really. [/quote]
huh? Then I am going to need a CPA explanation for what I am missing. I have been in the 28% income tax bracket for the entire time Obama has been president. I was at the lower end at the start, I am squarely in the middle now. What is it that I’m missing here?
Are you actually arguing that I paid more $ in taxes? Well yeah that might be true since my income increased (although it might not be because I went barely investing in my TSP to maxing it out at $17,500 so that might have offset), but are you arguing that my actual % paid has increased?
[quote]
The link you just posted has a 5 year yield of 0.75%… Like I said, you just broke even.[/quote]
Yeah and a 3 year rate of return of 12.2% genius. Are you saying that November 2007 was Obama’s economy? Seriously man, I can pull my actual fucking TSP statements if you want to but I posted the link for convenience. Surely you can’t be that argumentative that I need to do that.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:
Tis true.
My father, who was lucky enough to fall into a golden parachute, lamented that the republicans gave him no choice but to vote along party lines. He was a fantastic negotiator and did very well. He retired several times but was always brought back because he was good at what he did, when I was young, I remember him telling me never to vote along party lines but to choose each person for what they stood for. He was the person that every liked, it didn’t matter who you were or where you came from. He was the hardest worker I have ever known. Didn’t take a dime from his parents. He sold newspapers on the corners and worked for everything that he ever got. He voted for Reagan and he hated what became of the republican party.
Mostly, he hated that the republican party gave him no choice than to vote democrat.
I know this is only ancedoteal, but there are a lot of us out here who work and pay taxes and are turned off by the GOP.
[/quote]
Again, my “bubble” being criticized with… Other people’s bubbles?
I don’t get it.[/quote]
The difference is that she specified it was anecdotal and personal to her. Your generalizations that I have decreed “bubble-talk” were broad scale lumping of non-Romney supporters into a nice little package that you can argue against. You seriously think people didn’t vote for Romney because he has money? I mean, that is just so far out of touch with reality it barely merits rebuttal, and I wouldn’t have if it weren’t for the other bullshit that I think you get away with saying in this forum.
[quote]Christine wrote:
Well, my bubble is filled with hard working people who happened to make it. Some lean right, some lean left. But none of them hate on those who have money because they are all dining with good wines (really good) and plying golf on the best courses.[/quote]
I work with mostly rightys most moderate, couple hard right. I’m married to a progressive and my friends are a decent mix of extreme and moderate.
But yes, on social media, following the Obama grassroots, his wealth, tax status, off shore money, etc were a major issue for people.
Anyway, it is largely irrelevant. That isn’t what killed him in the end anyway.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Also, a blended 401k retirement fund like that is going to be in mostly equities with a retirement track for 2040.
You’re returns are going to mirror the S&P for a while until they slowly move into bonds and money markets as the fund approaches 2040.[/quote]
LOL thanks for the analysis, Kramer, but I’m not sure why you think I needed it? I know exactly what direction my investments are tracking in, that is why I said that MY PERSONAL INVESTMENTS HAVE INCREASED BY X%. I am still curious as to why your rebuttal to that was “well the market has broken even, so you’re wrong…nah nah nah boo boo”
[quote]Christine wrote:<<< He voted for Reagan and he hated what became of the republican party. >>>[/quote] Could I prevail upon you to further elucidate this point please?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
Is that the number that is dropping…[/quote]
[/quote]
Oh so you’re using a blip in the radar, and not the overall trend, as your basis for comparison? Got ya. that is a great way to do statistics. you must be great in that area at your job…
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:
Well, my bubble is filled with hard working people who happened to make it. Some lean right, some lean left. But none of them hate on those who have money because they are all dining with good wines (really good) and plying golf on the best courses.[/quote]
I work with mostly rightys most moderate, couple hard right. I’m married to a progressive and my friends are a decent mix of extreme and moderate.
But yes, on social media, following the Obama grassroots, his wealth, tax status, off shore money, etc were a major issue for people.
Anyway, it is largely irrelevant. That isn’t what killed him in the end anyway.[/quote]
It is what killed him though. It is more than keeping the status quo, and that is all Romney had to offer.
People who have worked hard and made it from nothing understand that it can be taken away and are actually okay with it. They can empathize with those starting out. Romney had no empathy.
Granted, I come from a strong, hard working family unit, but I have wondered many times what my life would have been like had I not had the same family. I don’t think that Romney has ever ever evn given his good luck a second thought.
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
Is that the number that is dropping…[/quote]
[/quote]
Oh so you’re using a blip in the radar, and not the overall trend, as your basis for comparison? Got ya. that is a great way to do statistics. you must be great in that area at your job…[/quote]
If you didn’t know it went back up to 7.9 just say so.
Democrats down to cheerleading 7.9 percent unemployment.
Cripes.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:<<< He voted for Reagan and he hated what became of the republican party. >>>[/quote] Could I prevail upon you to further elucidate this point please?
[/quote]
He was a negotiator at heart. He could always bring people to find a common ground. This is what made him so good at his job. Ultimately, he saw that the republicans were/ are unwilling to concede anything in order to move forward.
The GOP has drawn a line in the sand and have refused to move an inch.
[quote]Christine wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:<<< He voted for Reagan and he hated what became of the republican party. >>>[/quote] Could I prevail upon you to further elucidate this point please?
[/quote]
He was a negotiator at heart. He could always bring people to find a common ground. This is what made him so good at his job. Ultimately, he saw that the republicans were/ are unwilling to concede anything in order to move forward.
The GOP has drawn a line in the sand and have refused to move an inch.
[/quote]
And Obamcare? What about that popular piece of bi-partisanship?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Democrats down to cheerleading 7.9 percent unemployment.
Cripes.[/quote]
LOL and your guy lost the election with that number…
If it just weren’t for that damn birth control.
Are you a poster that is considered relevant in this forum as well? Man, quite a collection of intellectuals gathering here.
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
huh? Then I am going to need a CPA explanation for what I am missing. I have been in the 28% income tax bracket for the entire time Obama has been president. I was at the lower end at the start, I am squarely in the middle now. What is it that I’m missing here?
Are you actually arguing that I paid more $ in taxes? Well yeah that might be true since my income increased (although it might not be because I went barely investing in my TSP to maxing it out at $17,500 so that might have offset), but are you arguing that my actual % paid has increased?[/quote]
Depending where you started, yes. I really don’t want to do the math at midnight, but if you saved more than net 0.5% in tax after a 25% pay raise I would be surprised. But yeah, I normally think in terms of higher AGI’s so, you might have actually saved about half a percent in tax from the FICA reduction.
Tax rates are marginal. Just because you are in a bracket doesn’t mean you pay that % of your taxable income in tax.
For example:
You make 100k.
The First 15k is taxed at 0%
The next 25k is taxed at 10%
The next 25k is taxed at 25%
The next 25k is taxed at 30%
so on and so forth.
the yields are right there. Like I said a fund like that is heavy in equities right now, if not all in equities. It is going to mirror the S&P.
[quote]Christine wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:<<< He voted for Reagan and he hated what became of the republican party. >>>[/quote] Could I prevail upon you to further elucidate this point please?
[/quote]
He was a negotiator at heart. He could always bring people to find a common ground. This is what made him so good at his job. Ultimately, he saw that the republicans were/ are unwilling to concede anything in order to move forward.
The GOP has drawn a line in the sand and have refused to move an inch.
[/quote]With all due respect, negotiator is another word for convictionless compromiser. He didn’t do you any favors in what he taught you. The GOP has tragically moved 8000 miles in the last 50 years. They are further left than Kennedy’s Democrats. You’re living a myopic illusion of myopic youth which you will soon enough see for what it is. Long after it’s too late.