centof

@[email protected]

Currently browsing from alexandrite.app an alternative lemmy frontend.

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. View on remote instance

centof ,

Data only matters to them if they can use it to support the conclusions they want. Otherwise they just ignore at best or at worst call it fake news.

centof ,

For some companies, yes. Ultimately, it all extends from greed. Gotta keep my using my land because otherwise it will lose value. Gotta layoff people to make profits go up. Must make money printer go, Brrrrr.

Your ‘Set It and Forget It’ 401(k) Made You Rich. No More. — WSJ ( apple.news )

For four decades, patient savers able to grit their teeth through bubbles, crashes and geopolitical upheaval won the money game. But the formula of building a nest egg by rebalancing a standard mix of stocks and bonds isn’t going to work nearly as well as it has.

centof ,

First of all, I’m ignoring the incorrect assumption of the title that a 401k ever made anyone rich. At best it taught some people not to immediately spend all their money and to instead save some for the future.

The article’s trying to draw a correlation between present times and the 1960-1980 period when inflation was historically high. It assumes that because a 60 40 stock bond split did poorly in that time the same will apply to the immediate future.

To that point, bonds are designed to not perform as well as stocks as they are lower risk investments. Use them only if you are more worried about losing the money(in short term downturns) you’ve already built up than continuing to make your money compound continually and grow.

The reason for bonds in a portfolio is to hedge against the volatility of the stock market. You don’t need them if you aren’t gonna take out the money for 10+ years. Think of them as an insurance policy against the ups and downs of the market. They can help in the short term but in the long term, they are just a waste of money.

The ‘right’ way to invest for growth is to simply invest in a passively managed Fund or ETF with a low expense ratio (~0.05%) that tries to track the SP500 and simply keep holding it in the market. Time in market beats timing the market. Mr. Money Mustache advocates for essentially this approach as well as bogleheads with their investing principles.

Most employer offered 401ks are crap that limits peoples choices to a few ‘select’ offerings and does not include any good mutual funds or ETFs that meet the above criteria. Instead, they have much higher expense ratios that continually drain money from their accounts and rarely even match an SP500 based fund on performance even excluding fees.

The only use for 401ks is to take advantage of any matching policies they have in place. But it’s better to periodically rollover that 401k balance to an self-managed with vanguard IRA or Roth IRA. Any money you want to save in excess of the matching policies should instead be contributed to your IRA or Roth IRA.

centof ,

You are looking at it the wrong way, Because the market has traded mostly sideways for a while that means that the market is underpriced compared to what it should be. That is when you should be more willing to invest. I know it seems counterintuitive. This article explains the concept better than I can.

Since ~2019, the SP500 has gone up 45%. That is the equivalent of a 8.5% compound interest rate or 11% simple interest rate per year. If you’re portfolio accounts are under performing that by a big margin than you might want to switch Funds and/or account providers.

There are always gloomy articles and headlines meant to convince you to sell. Because they want to buy your stocks on the cheap.

centof ,

Everyone always quotes the growth of the S&P500, but isn’t pretty much no one 100% invested for their entire retirement in the S&P500?

Why does it matter if no one else does it? Investing is not a social experience. Most people don’t do it because they are uninformed and ignorant about how to manage their money. The easy option is the easy option because you someone else can get more of a cut of your money. You generally pick up to two of these three with any product: good, easy, cheap. The promoted target date funds are usually just easy. They have high expense ratios and are therefore not good or cheap.

centof ,

Fast Food workers aren’t trained to dehumanize the public and see them as a threat. Cops are. Cops are also trained to respond with violence and intimidation to any perceived threat to their authoritah.

(US) Introducing Comingle: An opt-in UBI (Universal Basic Income) to provide a stable weekly income based upon users contributing 7% of their income ( comingle.us )

Comingle is an interesting idea that would act as a pseudo emergency fund to provide a stable week to week income for their users. It could act to stabilize your income if you have an irregular income or as an backup plan or insurance for when you lose a job or income source. It works by distributing the average of all their...

centof OP ,

Your correct, technically it is a guaranteed basic income. The newsletter I heard about it from was one that promotes UBI so I got mixed up.

centof OP ,

There’s an FAQ on the website you can checkout.

centof OP , (edited )

Not really either, its a crowdfunded income equalizer. It is not based upon infinite growth so its not a ponzi scheme.

Edit:On second thought, it can act as unemployment insurance not backed by the government, but I would contend that is a good thing since the government programs often have an excessive amount of strings attached.

centof OP ,

Well excuse me for thinking the world can be anything outside the mainstream. No need for personal attacks.

centof OP , (edited )

Nice try tech bro. “Oh, we got hacked, whoopsie.”

That isn’t the meaning your post conveys. When you reply to my post name calling, someone unnamed, it is only natural to assume you are referring to me.

I already said I am not involved with it.

centof OP ,

It is very simple what they claim to do with your money: Average out the contributions and pay it back to its members. I would agree that when implemented you would need some transparency to show that the company isn’t taking more the agreed upon amount. As far as their ownership they claim to be organizing to prevent exploitative capital.

From the about page.

A New Kind of Company for a New Kind of Economy As we solidify our corporate structure, we’ll be adopting a steward-ownership model in which profits serve the mission of the company and protect it from extractive-capital. With legal safeguards built into the company’s DNA, investors are fairly compensated with capped returns while decisions remain in the hands of a core, purpose-driven team along with all Comingle members.

centof OP ,

It is as guaranteed as a company can provide. IF they operate honestly, I see no reason they would go bankrupt. I would assume the users would have recourse via small claims court or possibly other courts if they fail to provide what they agree to provide.

centof OP ,

He is an advisor to it according to their website.

centof OP ,

The website shows who their founders and partners are if you look. www.comingle.us/about-usAs I stated it is not yet launched so there is nothing that needs transparency at the moment. Eventually transparency would be nice once they get started so you know they aren’t misusing their funds.

centof OP ,

Not sure why people are downvoting me. I guess I offended someone. Not sure how. ** shrugs **

centof OP , (edited )

I’m curious what the social security system is like in your country(France?). The US theoretically has a safety net for people but it is sabotaged by 1/3 of the population and businesses to make it ineffective.

centof OP , (edited )

Of course there is an outside mechanism, it is

  • a. the government: if they lie about what they provide you can sue them like you can any other business that defrauds you.
  • b. you can always just stop letting them access your account if you don’t trust them.

Nothing is fully guaranteed. Society as we know it could easily collapse in our lifetime. Ultimately it will likely be a less conditional income than a job where you can be fired at any time for literally no reason. I see a guarantee as a promise essentially. It is only as trustworthy as the party guarantying it.

centof OP ,

While, I am not affiliated with them, I can see how this could be interpreted an ad. My intention was to highlight a potential way to use this service as a way to help with budgeting or income. It is certainly a type of service based around your personal finance that is novel and imo relevant to this community.

centof OP ,

Your link says its based on the cost of food for 3 people in a family at the 1960s . Surely there is nothing else you need in life besides food. /s It didn’t account for anything besides food cost. Not housing, vehicle, or gas cost.

Here’s a good read by about how ineffective the US’s safety net is https://www.scottsantens.com/the-progressive-case-for-replacing-the-welfare-state-with-universal-basic-income/ . TLDR Only 25% of those eligible actually use it.

Side note: this site was unfindable on google even when searching “scott santens welfare progressive” in google. Interesting.

centof OP ,

I see so basically strong worker and family protections, and healthcare not being treated as a extortion scheme. If only the US government wasn’t filled with bad actors who are basically unaccountable to the people.

centof OP ,

The only thing I got from the newsletter was a link to the website. I posted my thoughts in the title and post contents.

centof OP ,

So you individually sue them after they fail to make good on their claims.

Yes or as I stated earlier and is far more common, you can stop letting them have access to your financial account.

No, I really can’t see why that is a comprising position. This is how every business in the US operates. If a company defrauds you have to take it up with the company, (not likely to work if they are acting in bad faith), your financial instution or in a court individually or via a class action. How does this put you in any more of a compromising position than if you your internet stops working and continues to bill you for it?

The worst that could happen is you have to get your bank or credit card to stop paying them because they don’t live up to their end of the deal. While there is risk involved with giving companies access to withdraw from your bank account, there are also safeguards built into the system that can be used. All banks and credit card companies have ways to mitigate fraudulent billing. That is in addition to the option you always have of taking them to court.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • All magazines
    •