|
Posted by Una on September 19, 2007, 1:03 pm
Please log in for more thread options
>>> The age of mandatory withdrawals is 70 1/2. Do you really think
>>> you'll be making more @ 70 1/2 than you are now? I don't.
Una wrote:
>> In my case, almost certainly.
>Really? Now I'm curious. Exactly what do you do that gets you so much
>more salary at 70 1/2 than at (what's your age now?)? I just gotta know!
As I said, I did the conversions in a year when I was unemployed.
(The best financial advice I ever got was to save up 6 months worth
of living expenses. That was not so hard to do, once I decided to
do it, and it has done *wonderful* things for my peace of mind and
financial security.)
Also, in professions with large organizations where senior people
set the salaries for everyone, they usually set their salaries high
relative to others. Examples include attorneys in large firms,
university professors, physicians in group practices or hospital
networks, etc. Then there is the common pattern of moving up from
general staff to management.
I am aware that in some professions the pattern is different, with
the highest salaries expected in mid-career.
>> Re the "savings" of paying taxes now instead of later, consider this:
>> By putting $2000 in a pre-tax IRA you set aside $2000 now.
>> By putting $2000 in a Roth IRA you set aside $2000 *plus* taxes now.
>Sorry you lost me there.
Think about it. The Roth costs more up front, which means more money
is devoted to saving rather than being spent on coffee.
If Roth IRAs become taxable in future, I figure all financial bets are
off, so no point worrying about it now.
Una
|
|
Posted by Andrew DeFaria on September 19, 2007, 10:28 pm
Please log in for more thread options
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------040809070604070807000004
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Una wrote:
>> Really? Now I'm curious. Exactly what do you do that gets you so much
>> more salary at 70 1/2 than at (what's your age now?)? I just gotta know!
> As I said, I did the conversions in a year when I was unemployed.
I missed that.
> Also, in professions with large organizations where senior people set
> the salaries for everyone, they usually set their salaries high
> relative to others. Examples include attorneys in large firms,
> university professors, physicians in group practices or hospital
> networks, etc. Then there is the common pattern of moving up from
> general staff to management.
University professors really don't get paid that much. In just about all
businesses senior people set the salaries. Still most people make much
more money at 40 then 70.
> I am aware that in some professions the pattern is different, with the
> highest salaries expected in mid-career.
In *most* lines professions the 70 year olds are making much less than
the 40 year olds. Hell there but a few 70 year old CEOs but tons of 40
year olds. IOW there are 70 year olds that work, but they generally are
not the CEO or the attorney - they're plain folk.
>>> Re the "savings" of paying taxes now instead of later, consider this:
>>> By putting $2000 in a pre-tax IRA you set aside $2000 now.
>>> By putting $2000 in a Roth IRA you set aside $2000 *plus* taxes now.
>> Sorry you lost me there.
>
> Think about it. The Roth costs more up front, which means more money
> is devoted to saving rather than being spent on coffee.
Yes but it's not like you're putting away millions of dollars right now.
Besides your statement above is awkward at best if not confusing...
> If Roth IRAs become taxable in future, I figure all financial bets are
> off, so no point worrying about it now.
That's the spirit!
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
I think there is a world market for maybe five computers. - Thomas J.
Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943
--------------040809070604070807000004
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Una wrote:
DeFaria <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
<blockquote type="cite">Really? Now I'm curious. Exactly what do you
do that gets you so much more salary at 70 1/2 than at (what's your age
now?)? I just gotta know!<br>
</blockquote>
<!---->As I said, I did the conversions in a year when I was unemployed.<br>
</blockquote>
I missed that.<br>
in professions with large organizations where senior people set the
salaries for everyone, they usually set their salaries high relative to
others. Examples include attorneys in large firms, university
professors, physicians in group practices or hospital networks, etc.
Then there is the common pattern of moving up from general staff to
management.<br>
</blockquote>
University professors really don't get paid that much. In just about
all businesses senior people set the salaries. Still most people make
much more money at 40 then 70.<br>
aware that in some professions the pattern is different, with the
highest salaries expected in mid-career.<br>
</blockquote>
In <b>most</b> lines professions the 70 year olds are making much less
than the 40 year olds. Hell there but a few 70 year old CEOs but tons
of 40 year olds. IOW there are 70 year olds that work, but they
generally are not the CEO or the attorney - they're plain folk.<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Re the "savings" of paying taxes now
instead of later, consider this:<br>
By putting $2000 in a pre-tax IRA you set aside $2000 now.<br>
By putting $2000 in a Roth IRA you set aside $2000 *plus* taxes now.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Sorry you lost me there.<br>
</blockquote>
<!----><br>
Think about it. The Roth costs more up front, which means more money is
devoted to saving rather than being spent on coffee.<br>
</blockquote>
Yes but it's not like you're putting away millions of dollars right
now. Besides your statement above is awkward at best if not confusing...<br>
Roth IRAs become taxable in future, I figure all financial bets are
off, so no point worrying about it now.<br>
</blockquote>
That's the spirit!<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<a href="http://defaria.com">Andrew DeFaria</a><br>
<small><font color="#999999">I think there is a world market for maybe
five computers. - Thomas J. Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943</font></small>
</div>
</body>
</html>
--------------040809070604070807000004--
|
|
Posted by Una on September 19, 2007, 11:43 pm
Please log in for more thread options >University professors really don't get paid that much.
True. Nonetheless, junior faculty (who can spent 10 years as graduate
students and postdocs and adjunct slaves before they ever get onto the
"tenure track") get paid even less.
Unionized professions are another example.
>Still most people make much more money at 40 then 70.
Is that a fact? Where did you get it?
What most people make is irrelevant to me in making my financial plan;
what matters to me is what I expect in my own future. I expect that I
will be working still at 70 *and* earning more than I do now (adjusted
for inflation, of course).
Finally, Roth IRAs and similar aren't very appealing for rich people;
they are life savers for ordinary earners who want to save, not spend.
Una wrote:
>> Think about it. The Roth costs more up front, which means more money
>> is devoted to saving rather than being spent on coffee.
Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>Yes but it's not like you're putting away millions of dollars right now.
I think if I were putting away millions I would not bother with IRAs.
Someone who does waste time worrying which IRA is concerned with how
to make the most of (now) $3000 per year. You can take $3000 and put
it into a conventional IRA, or you can take $3000 * 1.28 (assuming a
28% tax bracket) = $3840 and put it into a Roth IRA. I assume I will
pay plenty of income tax, it's just a question of now or later. I
have some reason to prefer to pay it now.
Una
|
|
Posted by Andrew DeFaria on September 20, 2007, 12:26 am
Please log in for more thread options This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------050604070108050408060903
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Una wrote:
>> Still most people make much more money at 40 then 70.
> Is that a fact? Where did you get it?
School of hard knocks! Face it, of the say 1000 people working at a
business there is only 1 CEO and a few others on the top. This is just
plain common sense. Of the 900 other employees how many do you think
will funnel up to the top echelon of the company? The answer is not
many. It's like hitting it big as an actor, musician or sports star.
Many, many try. Few make it. And you didn't know this?
> What most people make is irrelevant to me in making my financial plan;
> what matters to me is what I expect in my own future. I expect that I
> will be working still at 70 *and* earning more than I do now (adjusted
> for inflation, of course).
While what happens to you in particular is obviously of paramount
importance, ignoring the usual trends in society, assuming you are above
that is both elitist and foolish! It's like going to the black jack
table and saying "I don't care what everybody else does or how the cards
usually fall, what the odds are or whatever - I just care about what the
next card will be for me". I've been to the black jack table many times.
People who play like you loose all your money fast!
> Finally, Roth IRAs and similar aren't very appealing for rich people;
> they are life savers for ordinary earners who want to save, not spend.
Is that a fact? Where did *you* get it?
> Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>> Yes but it's not like you're putting away millions of dollars right now.
> I think if I were putting away millions I would not bother with IRAs.
Then you'd be a fool fer sure. It's a way to get more return on your
money. Why would you give that up?
> Someone who does waste time worrying which IRA is concerned with how
> to make the most of (now) $3000 per year. You can take $3000 and put
> it into a conventional IRA, or you can take $3000 * 1.28 (assuming a
> 28% tax bracket) = $3840 and put it into a Roth IRA. I assume I will
> pay plenty of income tax, it's just a question of now or later. I have
> some reason to prefer to pay it now.
First off, last I checked it's been $4000 for a few years now. Secondly
if you're married you can put away double. Thirdly, most people who have
millions have businesses and there are many other avenues for putting
even more. For example, through my business I can put 25% of my earnings
away.
Sounds to me like you just don't know that much about this...
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
Hidden DOS secret: add BUGS=OFF to your CONFIG.SYS
--------------050604070108050408060903
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Una wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Still most people make much more money at 40
then 70.<br>
</blockquote>
Is that a fact? Where did you get it?<br>
</blockquote>
School of hard knocks! Face it, of the say 1000 people working at a
business there is only 1 CEO and a few others on the top. This is just
plain common sense. Of the 900 other employees how many do you think
will funnel up to the top echelon of the company? The answer is not
many. It's like hitting it big as an actor, musician or sports star.
Many, many try. Few make it. And you didn't know this?<br>
most people make is irrelevant to me in making my financial plan; what
matters to me is what I expect in my own future. I expect that I will
be working still at 70 *and* earning more than I do now (adjusted for
inflation, of course).<br>
</blockquote>
While what happens to you in particular is obviously of paramount
importance, ignoring the usual trends in society, assuming you are
above that is both elitist and foolish! It's like going to the black
jack table and saying "I don't care what everybody else does or how the
cards usually fall, what the odds are or whatever - I just care about
what the next card will be for me". I've been to the black jack table
many times. People who play like you loose all your money fast!<br>
Roth IRAs and similar aren't very appealing for rich people; they are
life savers for ordinary earners who want to save, not spend.<br>
</blockquote>
Is that a fact? Where did <b>you</b> get it?<br>
DeFaria wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Yes but it's not like you're putting away
millions of dollars right now. <br>
</blockquote>
<!---->I think if I were putting away millions I would not bother with
IRAs.<br>
</blockquote>
Then you'd be a fool fer sure. It's a way to get more return on your
money. Why would you give that up?<br>
who does waste time worrying which IRA is concerned with how to make
the most of (now) $3000 per year. You can take $3000 and put it into a
conventional IRA, or you can take $3000 * 1.28 (assuming a 28% tax
bracket) = $3840 and put it into a Roth IRA. I assume I will pay plenty
of income tax, it's just a question of now or later. I have some reason
to prefer to pay it now.<br>
</blockquote>
First off, last I checked it's been $4000 for a few years now. Secondly
if you're married you can put away double. Thirdly, most people who
have millions have businesses and there are many other avenues for
putting even more. For example, through my business I can put 25% of my
earnings away.<br>
<br>
Sounds to me like you just don't know that much about this...<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<a href="http://defaria.com">Andrew DeFaria</a><br>
<small><font color="#999999">Hidden DOS secret: add BUGS=OFF to your
CONFIG.SYS</font></small>
</div>
</body>
</html>
--------------050604070108050408060903--
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Employer Match -- Uncategorized | March 1, 2008, 8:08 pm |
| Employer NQ Options | January 26, 2007, 12:56 pm |
| Re: Employer Contribution Not Vested | July 2, 2006, 7:59 pm |
| Employer Contribution Not Vested | April 11, 2006, 11:42 pm |
| How to 401K Employer Contribution Corrected? | November 18, 2006, 3:26 pm |
| Need help with tracking employer paid benefits | May 4, 2007, 9:18 pm |
| Manually match transactions list | October 26, 2006, 8:46 am |
| Repairing Match with Online Security? | January 25, 2008, 11:19 am |
| How can Quicken help me to match the online balance? | February 8, 2008, 5:43 am |
| Adjusting share holdings to match brokerage stmt | December 3, 2007, 3:11 pm |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap