On 02/03/2016 12:03 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:



Since I'm with a company that specializes in older houses, I should be
able to get it for a while as I have been keeping up with the repairs.

New windows, new furnace, new wiring, new kitchen etc.

But yep, will need a new roof within the next few years.


As a home owner , whatever the roof will cost, will be only a small
fraction of what I've saved by not paying rent to a landlord.

Ah..but did you really "save" it or did you spend it on other things? ;-)




A little bit of each, when I was working I put the maximum amount
allowable in my 401k. so counting my company's contribution and
interest, though it is not huge fortune, at least I do have a bit of it
saved.

All those years I scrimped and saved (and stayed put) while I watched my
co-workers continually grow dissatisfied with the "bigger and better"
houses they kept buying.


Since my actual savings account pays something like 0.02% interest, no
real need to keep much money there other than enough to pay off my
monthly bills.

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:23:09 -0600, philo wrote:

On 02/03/2016 11:02 AM, Micky wrote:

I thought of that but decided to condemn the OP anyway.
Since the identical post was made a few years back I was quite confident

How did you know it was the same? You just remembered it?

that it was indeed a troll.



Yes, I have an exceptionally good memory for anything that is of zero
importance!

ROTFL. That's better than once remembering those things and now
forgetting.

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:21:34 -0600, philo wrote:

On 02/03/2016 11:00 AM, Micky wrote:



Yep, within the next few years I suppose I will have to get it all
removed and replaced.

I think you did the right thing. I'm surprised the insurance company
wouldn't write the policy for everything but roof-related damage, and
then when you eventually got a new roof, increase the coverage and the
premium to cover everything.




Nothing to do with insurance companies, it is simply human nature.


I once went into a hat store and when I described the type of hat I was
looking for (to the owner) he informed me they "don't have anything like
that."

After looking around a bit I found what I was looking for and
triumphantly brought it up to the counter. "Oh" he said, "that's not a
hat, that's a cap!"


Hilarious.


Way too funny to get upset. I gave you the short version as I had to go
through the same thing with the color and size.

On 02/03/2016 12:10 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 08:26:07 -0600, philo wrote:
ike that.

I'll be blunt, brief, and to the point.
* INSURANCE PEOPLE ARE ALL ASSHOLES *



So far that's pretty much been my experience as well.


I had to go to court (did not hire a lawyer) to get my own insurance
company to pay a $400 bill for a work-related sprained leg.


Though as soon as we got to the hearing they agreed to pay, I refused to
settle until I took it to as many subsequent hearings and trial as was
possible.

I am sure they spent thousands because of that.


After it was all over, the judge (who seemed to be a pretty nice guy)

sat around and talked about how rotten insurance companies are.

On 02/03/2016 12:18 PM, Micky wrote:


Yes, I have an exceptionally good memory for anything that is of zero
importance!

ROTFL. That's better than once remembering those things and now
forgetting.




Bugs the hell out of my wife , when we are driving she has to remind me
where we are going right in the middle of some story I'm telling her
that took place when I was three years old.

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 1:12:57 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 12:03 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:



Since I'm with a company that specializes in older houses, I should be
able to get it for a while as I have been keeping up with the repairs.

New windows, new furnace, new wiring, new kitchen etc.

But yep, will need a new roof within the next few years.


As a home owner , whatever the roof will cost, will be only a small
fraction of what I've saved by not paying rent to a landlord.

Ah..but did you really "save" it or did you spend it on other things? ;-)




A little bit of each, when I was working I put the maximum amount
allowable in my 401k. so counting my company's contribution and
interest, though it is not huge fortune, at least I do have a bit of it
saved.

All those years I scrimped and saved (and stayed put) while I watched my
co-workers continually grow dissatisfied with the "bigger and better"
houses they kept buying.


Since my actual savings account pays something like 0.02% interest, no
real need to keep much money there other than enough to pay off my
monthly bills.

If the money for the roof and other repairs are still in the 401(k)/IRA,
you might want to look at the tax advantages of taking a little bit out
each year to limit your tax exposure. If you are near the top of a tax
bracket each year you may pay more tax on that "lump sum" distribution if
you take it out all in one year.

You can always reinvest it outside of the qualified account if you still want
to try for some growth.

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 12:50:01 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 11:34 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:


Last November my agent called to tell me that Travelers was going to move
me to their tier system. They increased the amount of coverage for certain
items while reducing my rate by ~40%. The monthly reduction basically covers
the loan payment on the used car we just bought for my oldest daughter.

Sweet!




One reason my car insurance is low is because I have no moving
violations. Got a speeding ticket a few years back and I was so polite
to the small-town policeman he told me to take it to court and "they'd
do something to help me out."

It was a $90 ticket and I said, that would not be necessary, but he
really urged me to take it to court.


Then I realized that for insurance purposes I did not want that on my
record, my rates would probably go up...so I went to court and before I
could say anything, the magistrate asked me if I'd like it changed to a
non-moving violation with the same fine...so my insurance rates would
not go up.

That was easy.

After I got home I pulled the paid ticket out of my pocket to see what
they got me for. Yikes: Vandalizing a street sign! So now I am a
hardened criminal but one not paying much for car insurance at least.

I am really surprised at the "vandalizing" charge.

Based on my experience...err...I mean...from what I've heard, the typical
"reduction" is based on vehicle condition or driver action, not on some
unrelated incident.

I...err...I mean...people I know have been "reduced" to a noisy muffler
(on a brand new rental car), an obstructed license plate (which was covered
with *clear* plexiglas) and "failure to obey a traffic control device" (which,
from what I understand, is the most common reduction since that is actually
what I...err...I mean...the offending driver did).

On 2/3/2016 10:53 AM, Tony Hwang wrote:


Actually some are meant not to live in a single dwelling. They don't
seem to know what is going on around their place. Some years ago, a
couple won a nice size bungalow on a raffle. All their life, lived
in an apartment. They were so excited to move into nice house. They did
not even last one year living in a house. After ~3 months they went back
to old apartment. Claimed keeping a house was such a headache.

Yes, a woman at work has lived in rentals her entire life. Next year
she will retire and intends to go into senior housing subsidized by the
state. Not what I aspire to, but she seems to be happy with her choice.

On 02/03/2016 12:46 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:




A little bit of each, when I was working I put the maximum amount
allowable in my 401k. so counting my company's contribution and
interest, though it is not huge fortune, at least I do have a bit of it
saved.

All those years I scrimped and saved (and stayed put) while I watched my
co-workers continually grow dissatisfied with the "bigger and better"
houses they kept buying.


Since my actual savings account pays something like 0.02% interest, no
real need to keep much money there other than enough to pay off my
monthly bills.

If the money for the roof and other repairs are still in the 401(k)/IRA,
you might want to look at the tax advantages of taking a little bit out
each year to limit your tax exposure. If you are near the top of a tax
bracket each year you may pay more tax on that "lump sum" distribution if
you take it out all in one year.

You can always reinvest it outside of the qualified account if you still want
to try for some growth.




I'm not in any high tax bracket as my wife and I are both on Social
Security, I'm only pulling a small amount out of my 401k


I have enough in there that if I need to withdraw $10k or so, it won't
make much of an impact .

On 02/03/2016 01:00 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 12:50:01 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 11:34 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:


Last November my agent called to tell me that Travelers was going to move
me to their tier system. They increased the amount of coverage for certain
items while reducing my rate by ~40%. The monthly reduction basically covers
the loan payment on the used car we just bought for my oldest daughter.

Sweet!




One reason my car insurance is low is because I have no moving
violations. Got a speeding ticket a few years back and I was so polite
to the small-town policeman he told me to take it to court and "they'd
do something to help me out."

It was a $90 ticket and I said, that would not be necessary, but he
really urged me to take it to court.


Then I realized that for insurance purposes I did not want that on my
record, my rates would probably go up...so I went to court and before I
could say anything, the magistrate asked me if I'd like it changed to a
non-moving violation with the same fine...so my insurance rates would
not go up.

That was easy.

After I got home I pulled the paid ticket out of my pocket to see what
they got me for. Yikes: Vandalizing a street sign! So now I am a
hardened criminal but one not paying much for car insurance at least.

I am really surprised at the "vandalizing" charge.

Based on my experience...err...I mean...from what I've heard, the typical
"reduction" is based on vehicle condition or driver action, not on some
unrelated incident.

I...err...I mean...people I know have been "reduced" to a noisy muffler
(on a brand new rental car), an obstructed license plate (which was covered
with *clear* plexiglas) and "failure to obey a traffic control device" (which,
from what I understand, is the most common reduction since that is actually
what I...err...I mean...the offending driver did).




All they cared about was their money, they just charged me with
something that had the same fine. That was over five years ago and I'm
sure my record's been cleared by now

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 1:11:48 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 08:26:07 -0600, philo wrote:

Problem is, my home insurer closed operations in my state and I had to
find a different carrier. Most of them...right off the bat...took a look
at the roof and said they would not insure me. It did not matter that
there were no leaks.

I will never do business with State Farm ...ever..because the agent
insulated me as well. I was refused due to "lack of pride of ownership"
or something like that.

I'll be blunt, brief, and to the point.
* INSURANCE PEOPLE ARE ALL ASSHOLES *

I choose not to include my agent or even my Ins Co in your "all".

As I mentioned in my earlier post, my agent called me to tell me that my
Ins Co was going to increase my coverage while reducing my annual rate by
~40%. I've been with my agent for over 30 years. Maybe having a long term
relationship matters.

My agent has always been extremely helpful, especially during the time
when I was asking for multiple quotes as we tried to determine which cars
the girls should take back to college with them. When you factor in age,
driving experience, vehicle year/model and location, matching the
correct driver to the right vehicle can make a huge difference in the cost.

Having an independent agent that is willing to work hard to help determine
the best option and explain the details really beats calling some 8xx
number and talking to a complete stranger. When there was an issue with
an insurance document while I was at the DMV last year, my agent faxed a
corrected document directly to the DMV office and also emailed a copy to my
smartphone just in case there was a problem with the fax. I'd probably
*still* be on the phone with an 8xx rep trying to get it straightened out.

Since we were talking about roof replacement I decided to check to see
how old my roof actually is since I don't have any repair receipts going
back longer than 15 or 20 years.

Went on-line to city records and found all the permits pulled for this
house going back to 1932 but saw nothing for the roof.


I personally know the contractor to be a proper kind of a guy
so checked the rules and regulations and see that for simply adding
shingles to a roof, no permit is necessary.


In checking, I see that Milwaukee is just nuts about rules and a permit
is needed for just about everything...including a photo shoot...but no
requirement for a roof, unless rafters are replaced.

Incredibly...no permit is required for asbestos abatement if a single
family home. Very odd

In checking, I see that Milwaukee is just nuts about rules and a permit
is needed for just about everything...including a photo shoot...but no
requirement for a roof, unless rafters are replaced.

Incredibly...no permit is required for asbestos abatement if a single
family home. Very odd


For asbestos - I wonder if the bylaw states anything about
" certified / licensed / approved asbestos company " ?
And / or whether State or Federal legislation rules ?
John T.


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 2:19:36 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 12:46 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:




A little bit of each, when I was working I put the maximum amount
allowable in my 401k. so counting my company's contribution and
interest, though it is not huge fortune, at least I do have a bit of it
saved.

All those years I scrimped and saved (and stayed put) while I watched my
co-workers continually grow dissatisfied with the "bigger and better"
houses they kept buying.


Since my actual savings account pays something like 0.02% interest, no
real need to keep much money there other than enough to pay off my
monthly bills.

If the money for the roof and other repairs are still in the 401(k)/IRA,
you might want to look at the tax advantages of taking a little bit out
each year to limit your tax exposure. If you are near the top of a tax
bracket each year you may pay more tax on that "lump sum" distribution if
you take it out all in one year.

You can always reinvest it outside of the qualified account if you still want
to try for some growth.




I'm not in any high tax bracket as my wife and I are both on Social
Security, I'm only pulling a small amount out of my 401k

It's not about a "high" tax bracket, it's about any given tax bracket. This
is rough, but it explains the issue I am talking about.

Let's say your annual AGI is $5K lower than the top of the 15% bracket.
Right now, all of your income is taxed at 15%. Now let's say that you
estimate that you will need a roof in 3 years to the tune of $15K.

(To keep the numbers simple, let's ignore the fact that you need to
take out more than $15K to *net* $15K after taxes by assuming you
have other cash with which to pay the taxes.)

If you withdraw that $15K out in one year, $5K is going to be taxed in
the 15% bracket, but the remaining $10K is going to be taxed at 25%.

However, if you withdraw $5K extra per year for the next 3 years, the
entire $15K will be taxed at 15% because you didn't bump yourself into
a higher bracket in any given year. In the long run, you'll save yourself
$1000 in taxes.


I have enough in there that if I need to withdraw $10k or so, it won't
make much of an impact .

Maybe not an impact on your "savings" but it may cost you more in taxes.

On 02/03/2016 02:08 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:


ns the issue I am talking about.

Let's say your annual AGI is $5K lower than the top of the 15% bracket.
Right now, all of your income is taxed at 15%. Now let's say that you
estimate that you will need a roof in 3 years to the tune of $15K.

(To keep the numbers simple, let's ignore the fact that you need to
take out more than $15K to *net* $15K after taxes by assuming you
have other cash with which to pay the taxes.)

If you withdraw that $15K out in one year, $5K is going to be taxed in
the 15% bracket, but the remaining $10K is going to be taxed at 25%.

However, if you withdraw $5K extra per year for the next 3 years, the
entire $15K will be taxed at 15% because you didn't bump yourself into
a higher bracket in any given year. In the long run, you'll save yourself
$1000 in taxes.


I have enough in there that if I need to withdraw $10k or so, it won't
make much of an impact .

Maybe not an impact on your "savings" but it may cost you more in taxes.



Ok thanks for the advice...

I better start saving up now

On 02/03/2016 02:06 PM, wrote:


In checking, I see that Milwaukee is just nuts about rules and a permit
is needed for just about everything...including a photo shoot...but no
requirement for a roof, unless rafters are replaced.

Incredibly...no permit is required for asbestos abatement if a single
family home. Very odd


For asbestos - I wonder if the bylaw states anything about
" certified / licensed / approved asbestos company " ?
And / or whether State or Federal legislation rules ?
John T.

X

I am quite sure that asbestos abatement must be done by a company
certified to do so etc

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 10:16:28 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 2/3/2016 7:10 AM, philo wrote:


Of course it's a troll, even if the contractor was so bad that they did
not nail down half the shingles, their weight is sufficient (along with
the overlap) that they would not just start falling off a few days after
they were put up.


Quite a proclamation. What if they had storms the next day with 50 mph
winds.
Ir if the roof was "stapled" - particularly if the wrong staples were
used, or the decking was chipboard. Staples don't hold worth stink in
chipboard sheathing. (they are bad enough in plywood)

DerbyDad03 posted for all of us...



However, if you withdraw $5K extra per year for the next 3 years, the
entire $15K will be taxed at 15% because you didn't bump yourself into
a higher bracket in any given year. In the long run, you'll save yourself
$1000 in taxes.


How are potential gains affected by this?

--
Tekkie

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 08:39:06 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 9:26:12 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 07:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:


Probably so. But in case anyone else comes across this in the future
and has a similar problem, I'd suggest contacting the shingle manufacturer.
They offer warranties, provided they are installed correctly. The problem
most likely isn't the material, but they have field reps they will come
take a look on a claim. I'd be there, go up with the rep, take pics,
document everything, get a written claim denial in writing explaining
what the real problem is, etc.

Also a sign that it's likely a troll is that there is no mention of the
roofer being called back. You would think that some initial problem
would surface, they'd be called, etc, ie there would be more of a progression
than it's 3 months later and the shingles are falling off. Never heard
of a shingle job where that happened, not without high wind, etc.



I had a new roof put on 25 years ago that went over the existing
shingles. The new roof did not lie 100% flat. The roofer told me that
because the original shingles did not lie flat the new roof would not
either, but would eventually settle in.

That never happened, they are still a bit uneven and doggone it the roof
is 100% leak-proof.

Problem is, my home insurer closed operations in my state and I had to
find a different carrier. Most of them...right off the bat...took a look
at the roof and said they would not insure me. It did not matter that
there were no leaks.

I will never do business with State Farm ...ever..because the agent
insulated me as well. I was refused due to "lack of pride of ownership"
or something like that.


The next roof will require a "tear-off" as there are now two layers.
Thing is, why replace a roof that doesn't leak?

I forgot to mention this:

Again, not knowing your specific situation regarding climate, etc. I don't
know if this applies...

You have a 25 year old roof on top of a roof that is what? 15, 20, 25 years
old? Obviously that roof was failing or you wouldn't have re-roofed.

Roofing technology, from shingles to nailing patterns to underlayment have
changed dramatically in the 40 - 50 years since your first layer was put on.

So now you have a 2nd roof that is probably near the end of its warranty
period on top of a roof that is way behind its warranty period and mostly
likely not installed using "modern day" methods.

If I were a Ins Co, a lender or even a buyer, I would be really concerned
with a roof of that age, condition and installation method.
Particularly since the average roof, installed PROPERLY is totally
worn out before the "anticipated end of life" arrived at from their
"warranty" numbers.

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:49:54 -0600, philo wrote:

On 02/03/2016 11:34 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:


Last November my agent called to tell me that Travelers was going to move
me to their tier system. They increased the amount of coverage for certain
items while reducing my rate by ~40%. The monthly reduction basically covers
the loan payment on the used car we just bought for my oldest daughter.

Sweet!




One reason my car insurance is low is because I have no moving
violations. Got a speeding ticket a few years back and I was so polite
to the small-town policeman he told me to take it to court and "they'd
do something to help me out."

It was a $90 ticket and I said, that would not be necessary, but he
really urged me to take it to court.


Then I realized that for insurance purposes I did not want that on my
record, my rates would probably go up...so I went to court and before I
could say anything, the magistrate asked me if I'd like it changed to a
non-moving violation with the same fine...so my insurance rates would
not go up.

That was easy.

After I got home I pulled the paid ticket out of my pocket to see what
they got me for. Yikes: Vandalizing a street sign! So now I am a
hardened criminal but one not paying much for car insurance at least.
A bit like my experience, but in reverse (sorta).
I was driving a 1949 VW bug in Livingston Zambia back in about '73 or
'74. The muffler had deteriorated to the point there was virtually
nothing left, and it was NOISY - but no new parts were available. I
got pulled over and charged with driving with a defective muffler. The
fine was rediculous - something like Kw75 - and a Kwatch back then was
about $1.65.

I went down to the "boma" to look after the fine and asked to see the
schedule of fines/offences and noticed "no muffler installed" was only
Kw15, so I told the clerk they had charged me with the wrong offense,
as there was no muffler on my car. They went out and looked - and not
being able to find any sign of a muffler, reluctantly took my Kw15 and
reminded me I needed to get the muffler replaced - so I headed back to
the shop at the school and made one from an old driveshaft, a
landrover gas filler pipe and some plumbing fittings.

DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 2:19:36 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 12:46 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:




A little bit of each, when I was working I put the maximum amount
allowable in my 401k. so counting my company's contribution and
interest, though it is not huge fortune, at least I do have a bit of it
saved.

All those years I scrimped and saved (and stayed put) while I watched my
co-workers continually grow dissatisfied with the "bigger and better"
houses they kept buying.


Since my actual savings account pays something like 0.02% interest, no
real need to keep much money there other than enough to pay off my
monthly bills.

If the money for the roof and other repairs are still in the 401(k)/IRA,
you might want to look at the tax advantages of taking a little bit out
each year to limit your tax exposure. If you are near the top of a tax
bracket each year you may pay more tax on that "lump sum" distribution if
you take it out all in one year.

You can always reinvest it outside of the qualified account if you still want
to try for some growth.




I'm not in any high tax bracket as my wife and I are both on Social
Security, I'm only pulling a small amount out of my 401k

It's not about a "high" tax bracket, it's about any given tax bracket. This
is rough, but it explains the issue I am talking about.

Let's say your annual AGI is $5K lower than the top of the 15% bracket.
Right now, all of your income is taxed at 15%. Now let's say that you
estimate that you will need a roof in 3 years to the tune of $15K.

(To keep the numbers simple, let's ignore the fact that you need to
take out more than $15K to *net* $15K after taxes by assuming you
have other cash with which to pay the taxes.)

If you withdraw that $15K out in one year, $5K is going to be taxed in
the 15% bracket, but the remaining $10K is going to be taxed at 25%.

However, if you withdraw $5K extra per year for the next 3 years, the
entire $15K will be taxed at 15% because you didn't bump yourself into
a higher bracket in any given year. In the long run, you'll save yourself
$1000 in taxes.


I have enough in there that if I need to withdraw $10k or so, it won't
make much of an impact .

Maybe not an impact on your "savings" but it may cost you more in taxes.

I thought personal financial matters are confidential ans private.
Is this a contest for I am richer than you or I know more than you do?
What an argument!

philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 02:06 PM, wrote:


In checking, I see that Milwaukee is just nuts about rules and a permit
is needed for just about everything...including a photo shoot...but no
requirement for a roof, unless rafters are replaced.

Incredibly...no permit is required for asbestos abatement if a single
family home. Very odd


For asbestos - I wonder if the bylaw states anything about
" certified / licensed / approved asbestos company " ?
And / or whether State or Federal legislation rules ?
John T.

X

I am quite sure that asbestos abatement must be done by a company
certified to do so etc

For one's own good.

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:21:16 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 1:11:48 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 08:26:07 -0600, philo wrote:

Problem is, my home insurer closed operations in my state and I had to
find a different carrier. Most of them...right off the bat...took a look
at the roof and said they would not insure me. It did not matter that
there were no leaks.

I will never do business with State Farm ...ever..because the agent
insulated me as well. I was refused due to "lack of pride of ownership"
or something like that.

I'll be blunt, brief, and to the point.
* INSURANCE PEOPLE ARE ALL ASSHOLES *

I choose not to include my agent or even my Ins Co in your "all".

As I mentioned in my earlier post, my agent called me to tell me that my
Ins Co was going to increase my coverage while reducing my annual rate by
~40%. I've been with my agent for over 30 years. Maybe having a long term
relationship matters.

My agent has always been extremely helpful, especially during the time
when I was asking for multiple quotes as we tried to determine which cars
the girls should take back to college with them. When you factor in age,
driving experience, vehicle year/model and location, matching the
correct driver to the right vehicle can make a huge difference in the cost.

Having an independent agent that is willing to work hard to help determine
the best option and explain the details really beats calling some 8xx
number and talking to a complete stranger. When there was an issue with
an insurance document while I was at the DMV last year, my agent faxed a
corrected document directly to the DMV office and also emailed a copy to my
smartphone just in case there was a problem with the fax. I'd probably
*still* be on the phone with an 8xx rep trying to get it straightened out.


"your best insurance is an insurance broker"

Dealing direct with an insurance company through an agent (like
StateFarm, Geico, Allstate et al) they hold all the cards.
Dealing with a broker - particularly a fairly large broker with a
large "book" of insurance puts some of the cards in YOUR hand. The
broker works for YOU, not the insurance company. An agent works for
the insurance company - not for you. Generally speaking, this means
the broker goes to bat for you carrying a BIG BAT. If the insurer gets
picky or nasty and doesn't cover what they should cover, they stand a
very real chance of not only losing you as a customer, but possibly
hundreds of thousands of dollars in premiums when the broker decides
to move a sizeable percentage of their "book" to another company who
is more likely to "play ball" when a client needs help.

I spend about 20 hours a week in a pretty good sized insurance
brokerage where my youngest daughter is also Assistant Operations
Manager, and I see that bat weilded on a pretty regular basis. If one
company won't play ball, there are another 5 or six waiting in the
wings for most policies. There are some risks that only one or two
will cover, or be competetive on - and some companies that they only
write policies with as a "last resort" because they are more
difficult to deal with. - but generally if the CSR gets on the
insurance company's case, things happen - and pretty quickly.

A phone call goes like "how many millions of dollars of insurance do
we have with you? --- and how many claims have you had to pay out?
--- and you want to risk that kind of business by dragging this out
for another month or making the insured jump through more hoops?? I
didn't think so.. We will be expecting the check in the mail. You have
a good day too -"

Or getting insurance for something a bit out of the ordinary for one
of the "programs" - let's say well drillers. The broker calls the
insurer of record and asks "can you cover -------? The insurer says
"it's not something we run into every day - let me check." - and comes
back with something like "What ro YOU think - what is this similar too
and what kind of rating would you be comfortable with - you've got a
pretty good record on this program - your loss ratios are REALLY low -
how does $X per thousand sound to you"?

And the "uninsurable" has just been insured - often for far less than
the customer was expecting - all because he's got the weight of a good
broker (and an affinity group) on his team.

A good broker is worth his weight in gold when you need him!!!

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 12:08:14 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 2:19:36 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 12:46 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:




A little bit of each, when I was working I put the maximum amount
allowable in my 401k. so counting my company's contribution and
interest, though it is not huge fortune, at least I do have a bit of it
saved.

All those years I scrimped and saved (and stayed put) while I watched my
co-workers continually grow dissatisfied with the "bigger and better"
houses they kept buying.


Since my actual savings account pays something like 0.02% interest, no
real need to keep much money there other than enough to pay off my
monthly bills.

If the money for the roof and other repairs are still in the 401(k)/IRA,
you might want to look at the tax advantages of taking a little bit out
each year to limit your tax exposure. If you are near the top of a tax
bracket each year you may pay more tax on that "lump sum" distribution if
you take it out all in one year.

You can always reinvest it outside of the qualified account if you still want
to try for some growth.




I'm not in any high tax bracket as my wife and I are both on Social
Security, I'm only pulling a small amount out of my 401k

It's not about a "high" tax bracket, it's about any given tax bracket. This
is rough, but it explains the issue I am talking about.

Let's say your annual AGI is $5K lower than the top of the 15% bracket.
Right now, all of your income is taxed at 15%. Now let's say that you
estimate that you will need a roof in 3 years to the tune of $15K.

(To keep the numbers simple, let's ignore the fact that you need to
take out more than $15K to *net* $15K after taxes by assuming you
have other cash with which to pay the taxes.)

If you withdraw that $15K out in one year, $5K is going to be taxed in
the 15% bracket, but the remaining $10K is going to be taxed at 25%.

However, if you withdraw $5K extra per year for the next 3 years, the
entire $15K will be taxed at 15% because you didn't bump yourself into
a higher bracket in any given year. In the long run, you'll save yourself
$1000 in taxes.


I have enough in there that if I need to withdraw $10k or so, it won't
make much of an impact .

Maybe not an impact on your "savings" but it may cost you more in taxes.
Unless his income is low enough he's not paying any appreciable
amount of taxes as it is. Your strategy would likely save "some" taxes
- but significantly less.

On 2/2/2016 4:44 PM, Leslie wrote: lip snip

Have sex with the owner and maybe he'll help you out.
Remember, make your pussy work for you and everything will come out
smelling like roses.

On 02/03/2016 04:22 PM, wrote:

..
A bit like my experience, but in reverse (sorta).
I was driving a 1949 VW bug in Livingston Zambia back in about '73 or
'74. The muffler had deteriorated to the point there was virtually
nothing left, and it was NOISY - but no new parts were available. I
got pulled over and charged with driving with a defective muffler. The
fine was rediculous - something like Kw75 - and a Kwatch back then was
about $1.65.

I went down to the "boma" to look after the fine and asked to see the
schedule of fines/offences and noticed "no muffler installed" was only
Kw15, so I told the clerk they had charged me with the wrong offense,
as there was no muffler on my car. They went out and looked - and not
being able to find any sign of a muffler, reluctantly took my Kw15 and
reminded me I needed to get the muffler replaced - so I headed back to
the shop at the school and made one from an old driveshaft, a
landrover gas filler pipe and some plumbing fittings.


Great story and even nicer to hear from another hardened criminal

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 6:04:48 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 12:08:14 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 2:19:36 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 12:46 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:




A little bit of each, when I was working I put the maximum amount
allowable in my 401k. so counting my company's contribution and
interest, though it is not huge fortune, at least I do have a bit of it
saved.

All those years I scrimped and saved (and stayed put) while I watched my
co-workers continually grow dissatisfied with the "bigger and better"
houses they kept buying.


Since my actual savings account pays something like 0.02% interest, no
real need to keep much money there other than enough to pay off my
monthly bills.

If the money for the roof and other repairs are still in the 401(k)/IRA,
you might want to look at the tax advantages of taking a little bit out
each year to limit your tax exposure. If you are near the top of a tax
bracket each year you may pay more tax on that "lump sum" distribution if
you take it out all in one year.

You can always reinvest it outside of the qualified account if you still want
to try for some growth.




I'm not in any high tax bracket as my wife and I are both on Social
Security, I'm only pulling a small amount out of my 401k

It's not about a "high" tax bracket, it's about any given tax bracket. This
is rough, but it explains the issue I am talking about.

Let's say your annual AGI is $5K lower than the top of the 15% bracket.
Right now, all of your income is taxed at 15%. Now let's say that you
estimate that you will need a roof in 3 years to the tune of $15K.

(To keep the numbers simple, let's ignore the fact that you need to
take out more than $15K to *net* $15K after taxes by assuming you
have other cash with which to pay the taxes.)

If you withdraw that $15K out in one year, $5K is going to be taxed in
the 15% bracket, but the remaining $10K is going to be taxed at 25%.

However, if you withdraw $5K extra per year for the next 3 years, the
entire $15K will be taxed at 15% because you didn't bump yourself into
a higher bracket in any given year. In the long run, you'll save yourself
$1000 in taxes.


I have enough in there that if I need to withdraw $10k or so, it won't
make much of an impact .

Maybe not an impact on your "savings" but it may cost you more in taxes.
Unless his income is low enough he's not paying any appreciable
amount of taxes as it is. Your strategy would likely save "some" taxes
- but significantly less.

All I gave was an example to explain the concept. I even started it off
with "This is rough, but it explains the issue I am talking about." Use
any tax bracket and any dollar amount you would like, the "math" is the
same, the savings will obviously differ.

What I was discussing is the reason why some people do "small" Roth
conversions every year. The goal is to distribute money from a qualified
account at their current tax rate to avoid being bumped into a higher
bracket when they reach 70 1/2 and are forced to take their RMD.

It doesn't make sense for everyone one, but it is a viable tax planning
strategy for some.

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 08:26:07 -0600, philo wrote:

I had a new roof put on 25 years ago that went over the existing
shingles. The new roof did not lie 100% flat. The roofer told me that
because the original shingles did not lie flat the new roof would not
either, but would eventually settle in.


That was common with roll roofing, but not worth doing with shingles.
Penny wise, pound foolish.

On 2/3/2016 5:56 PM, wrote:


And the "uninsurable" has just been insured - often for far less than
the customer was expecting - all because he's got the weight of a good
broker (and an affinity group) on his team.

A good broker is worth his weight in gold when you need him!!!


Yes. Most of us only see homeowners and high price auto insurance. A
good broker makes sure you have the insurance you need for your
circumstances. Twice I was in situations with large (multi million $)
losses that would have put us out of business if not properly insured.

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 5:56:05 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:21:16 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 1:11:48 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 08:26:07 -0600, philo wrote:

Problem is, my home insurer closed operations in my state and I had to
find a different carrier. Most of them...right off the bat...took a look
at the roof and said they would not insure me. It did not matter that
there were no leaks.

I will never do business with State Farm ...ever..because the agent
insulated me as well. I was refused due to "lack of pride of ownership"
or something like that.

I'll be blunt, brief, and to the point.
* INSURANCE PEOPLE ARE ALL ASSHOLES *

I choose not to include my agent or even my Ins Co in your "all".

As I mentioned in my earlier post, my agent called me to tell me that my
Ins Co was going to increase my coverage while reducing my annual rate by
~40%. I've been with my agent for over 30 years. Maybe having a long term
relationship matters.

My agent has always been extremely helpful, especially during the time
when I was asking for multiple quotes as we tried to determine which cars
the girls should take back to college with them. When you factor in age,
driving experience, vehicle year/model and location, matching the
correct driver to the right vehicle can make a huge difference in the cost.

Having an independent agent that is willing to work hard to help determine
the best option and explain the details really beats calling some 8xx
number and talking to a complete stranger. When there was an issue with
an insurance document while I was at the DMV last year, my agent faxed a
corrected document directly to the DMV office and also emailed a copy to my
smartphone just in case there was a problem with the fax. I'd probably
*still* be on the phone with an 8xx rep trying to get it straightened out.


"your best insurance is an insurance broker"

Dealing direct with an insurance company through an agent (like
StateFarm, Geico, Allstate et al) they hold all the cards.
Dealing with a broker - particularly a fairly large broker with a
large "book" of insurance puts some of the cards in YOUR hand. The
broker works for YOU, not the insurance company. An agent works for
the insurance company - not for you.

When you use the title "agent", you need to be more specific. There are
"captive agents" and "independent agents".

According the Investopedia, an independent agent does not work for "the"
insurance company.

"Definition of 'Independent Agent'

An insurance agent that sells insurance policies provided by several different
insurance companies rather than a single insurance company. An independent
agent receives commissions for the policies that he or she sells, and is not
considered an employee of a specific insurance company."

Granted, a "broker" may be even more independent than an independent agent,
and a broker, by law, has a fiduciary duty to the client. However, in some
cases, depending on the relationship between the policy holder and the
independent agent, some courts have ruled that the agent was acting as a
broker and could therefore have a fiduciary duty to the client.

In any case, my agent is an independent and offers insurance products from a
number of carriers. The mere fact that she called me to tell me my rates
were going down by ~40% is enough for me to continue our relationship.

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 5:24:12 PM UTC-5, Tony Hwang wrote:
DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 2:19:36 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 12:46 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:




A little bit of each, when I was working I put the maximum amount
allowable in my 401k. so counting my company's contribution and
interest, though it is not huge fortune, at least I do have a bit of it
saved.

All those years I scrimped and saved (and stayed put) while I watched my
co-workers continually grow dissatisfied with the "bigger and better"
houses they kept buying.


Since my actual savings account pays something like 0.02% interest, no
real need to keep much money there other than enough to pay off my
monthly bills.

If the money for the roof and other repairs are still in the 401(k)/IRA,
you might want to look at the tax advantages of taking a little bit out
each year to limit your tax exposure. If you are near the top of a tax
bracket each year you may pay more tax on that "lump sum" distribution if
you take it out all in one year.

You can always reinvest it outside of the qualified account if you still want
to try for some growth.




I'm not in any high tax bracket as my wife and I are both on Social
Security, I'm only pulling a small amount out of my 401k

It's not about a "high" tax bracket, it's about any given tax bracket. This
is rough, but it explains the issue I am talking about.

Let's say your annual AGI is $5K lower than the top of the 15% bracket.
Right now, all of your income is taxed at 15%. Now let's say that you
estimate that you will need a roof in 3 years to the tune of $15K.

(To keep the numbers simple, let's ignore the fact that you need to
take out more than $15K to *net* $15K after taxes by assuming you
have other cash with which to pay the taxes.)

If you withdraw that $15K out in one year, $5K is going to be taxed in
the 15% bracket, but the remaining $10K is going to be taxed at 25%.

However, if you withdraw $5K extra per year for the next 3 years, the
entire $15K will be taxed at 15% because you didn't bump yourself into
a higher bracket in any given year. In the long run, you'll save yourself
$1000 in taxes.


I have enough in there that if I need to withdraw $10k or so, it won't
make much of an impact .

Maybe not an impact on your "savings" but it may cost you more in taxes.

I thought personal financial matters are confidential ans private.
Is this a contest for I am richer than you or I know more than you do?
What an argument!

What the heck are you talking about?

All I was discussing was a tax planning strategy that could be employed
by anyone that has money in a qualified account. There was no personal
information shared or asked for and there was no "richer or smarter than"
implied or intended.

What's got your panties in a wad?

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 5:10:42 PM UTC-5, Tekkie® wrote:
DerbyDad03 posted for all of us...



However, if you withdraw $5K extra per year for the next 3 years, the
entire $15K will be taxed at 15% because you didn't bump yourself into
a higher bracket in any given year. In the long run, you'll save yourself
$1000 in taxes.


How are potential gains affected by this?

--
Tekkie

As I said in an earlier post, you don't have to leave the distributions in
cash, you can reinvest the net amount in the same investments that were used
in the qualified account.

Obviously there will be less to invest and the growth will be taxed in a
different manner (capital gains and dividends instead of income) so the
strategy should be considered with careful planning to determine if it
makes sense.

DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 5:24:12 PM UTC-5, Tony Hwang wrote:
DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 2:19:36 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 12:46 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:




A little bit of each, when I was working I put the maximum amount
allowable in my 401k. so counting my company's contribution and
interest, though it is not huge fortune, at least I do have a bit of it
saved.

All those years I scrimped and saved (and stayed put) while I watched my
co-workers continually grow dissatisfied with the "bigger and better"
houses they kept buying.


Since my actual savings account pays something like 0.02% interest, no
real need to keep much money there other than enough to pay off my
monthly bills.

If the money for the roof and other repairs are still in the 401(k)/IRA,
you might want to look at the tax advantages of taking a little bit out
each year to limit your tax exposure. If you are near the top of a tax
bracket each year you may pay more tax on that "lump sum" distribution if
you take it out all in one year.

You can always reinvest it outside of the qualified account if you still want
to try for some growth.




I'm not in any high tax bracket as my wife and I are both on Social
Security, I'm only pulling a small amount out of my 401k

It's not about a "high" tax bracket, it's about any given tax bracket. This
is rough, but it explains the issue I am talking about.

Let's say your annual AGI is $5K lower than the top of the 15% bracket.
Right now, all of your income is taxed at 15%. Now let's say that you
estimate that you will need a roof in 3 years to the tune of $15K.

(To keep the numbers simple, let's ignore the fact that you need to
take out more than $15K to *net* $15K after taxes by assuming you
have other cash with which to pay the taxes.)

If you withdraw that $15K out in one year, $5K is going to be taxed in
the 15% bracket, but the remaining $10K is going to be taxed at 25%.

However, if you withdraw $5K extra per year for the next 3 years, the
entire $15K will be taxed at 15% because you didn't bump yourself into
a higher bracket in any given year. In the long run, you'll save yourself
$1000 in taxes.


I have enough in there that if I need to withdraw $10k or so, it won't
make much of an impact .

Maybe not an impact on your "savings" but it may cost you more in taxes.

I thought personal financial matters are confidential ans private.
Is this a contest for I am richer than you or I know more than you do?
What an argument!

What the heck are you talking about?

All I was discussing was a tax planning strategy that could be employed
by anyone that has money in a qualified account. There was no personal
information shared or asked for and there was no "richer or smarter than"
implied or intended.

What's got your panties in a wad?

Sounds like no personal banker, lawyer, accountant.

On 02/03/2016 07:22 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
]


snip

Sounds like no personal banker, lawyer, accountant.



You are correct, I have no personal banker, accountant or financial
advisor. (Did hire a lawyer to do my will though)

A few times advisors have called on me and since I have been investing
in the stock market for over 50 years and have been quite successful , I
was the one who ended up giving them advice.

Started when I was 13 years old and my dad of course invested for me.

Mentioned this before somewhere but will repeat:


Choosing a good stock is not that difficult, the hard part is having the
years of experience to know you can ride something out. VIZ: A cast iron
stomach.

No matter what, the stock market has it's ups and downs and one must
learn /not/ to panic and sell when things drop.


I started my daughter in the same tradition and she started calling the
shots at even an earlier age then me. As a result the few thousand
dollars worth of her childhood birthday and Christmas money grew
sufficiently to put herself through college and graduate debt free.

I gave her a little help with car repairs etc but she has been damn
independent.

"philo" wrote in message ...
On 02/03/2016 07:22 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
]


snip

Sounds like no personal banker, lawyer, accountant.



You are correct, I have no personal banker, accountant or financial
advisor. (Did hire a lawyer to do my will though)

I hired a lawyer once. He ripped me off. Now he's RIP himself.

A few times advisors have called on me and since I have been investing
in the stock market for over 50 years and have been quite successful , I
was the one who ended up giving them advice.

Started when I was 13 years old and my dad of course invested for me.

Mentioned this before somewhere but will repeat:


Choosing a good stock is not that difficult, the hard part is having the
years of experience to know you can ride something out. VIZ: A cast iron
stomach.

No matter what, the stock market has it's ups and downs and one must
learn /not/ to panic and sell when things drop.


I started my daughter in the same tradition and she started calling the
shots at even an earlier age then me. As a result the few thousand
dollars worth of her childhood birthday and Christmas money grew
sufficiently to put herself through college and graduate debt free.

I gave her a little help with car repairs etc but she has been damn
independent.

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 14:05:56 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 2/3/2016 10:53 AM, Tony Hwang wrote:


Actually some are meant not to live in a single dwelling. They don't
seem to know what is going on around their place. Some years ago, a
couple won a nice size bungalow on a raffle. All their life, lived
in an apartment. They were so excited to move into nice house. They did
not even last one year living in a house. After ~3 months they went back
to old apartment. Claimed keeping a house was such a headache.

Yes, a woman at work has lived in rentals her entire life. Next year
she will retire and intends to go into senior housing subsidized by the
state. Not what I aspire to, but she seems to be happy with her choice.

OTOH, my friend from Brooklyn has lived in apartments all his life.
After he'd beea lawyer for a few years, he wanted to buy an apartment
in Brooklyn Heights (where Patty Duke and her identical cousin lived)
and walk across the bridge to work, but his fiancee had lived in
Manhattan all *her* life and wouldn't agree to that. They ended up
with an apartment on E. 57th and 1st, but because he didnt' work
steady, coudlnt' find a job all the time, with the glut of lawyers in
NYC, they sort of ran out of money and about a year ago moved to a
southern state, where they are renting a small house (with their boxes
all over the place) until they can buy a house.

But they (or maybe he) have so many demands, they can't find a house
that meets all of them. Partly because the kind of house they want
wasn't really built where they live now. I think they want a garage.
They have lots of money now, because their apartment in NYC cost and
sold for much more, even deducting the unpaid mortgage, than a house
in the south costs.

They're in their late 50's and early 60's and I told them to buy a
one-story house, for when they can't make it upstairs. They're both
slim and healthy, but even slim people can get to the point where they
can't climb stairs. Anyhow, I think he's ignoring me on that.

On 02/03/2016 09:15 PM, Snuffy "Hub Cap" McKinney wrote:
"philo" wrote in message ...
On 02/03/2016 07:22 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
]


snip

Sounds like no personal banker, lawyer, accountant.



You are correct, I have no personal banker, accountant or financial
advisor. (Did hire a lawyer to do my will though)

I hired a lawyer once. He ripped me off. Now he's RIP himself.



The only other time I hired a lawyer was when I got divorced.
since it was what they say a "friendly" divorce the fee was just $175

I figured it was easier just to agree with her.

A friend of mine spent $5000 on a lawyer and ended up having to give
everything to his ex-wife anyway

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 16:53:21 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 5:56:05 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:21:16 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 1:11:48 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 08:26:07 -0600, philo wrote:

Problem is, my home insurer closed operations in my state and I had to
find a different carrier. Most of them...right off the bat...took a look
at the roof and said they would not insure me. It did not matter that
there were no leaks.

I will never do business with State Farm ...ever..because the agent
insulated me as well. I was refused due to "lack of pride of ownership"
or something like that.

I'll be blunt, brief, and to the point.
* INSURANCE PEOPLE ARE ALL ASSHOLES *

I choose not to include my agent or even my Ins Co in your "all".

As I mentioned in my earlier post, my agent called me to tell me that my
Ins Co was going to increase my coverage while reducing my annual rate by
~40%. I've been with my agent for over 30 years. Maybe having a long term
relationship matters.

My agent has always been extremely helpful, especially during the time
when I was asking for multiple quotes as we tried to determine which cars
the girls should take back to college with them. When you factor in age,
driving experience, vehicle year/model and location, matching the
correct driver to the right vehicle can make a huge difference in the cost.

Having an independent agent that is willing to work hard to help determine
the best option and explain the details really beats calling some 8xx
number and talking to a complete stranger. When there was an issue with
an insurance document while I was at the DMV last year, my agent faxed a
corrected document directly to the DMV office and also emailed a copy to my
smartphone just in case there was a problem with the fax. I'd probably
*still* be on the phone with an 8xx rep trying to get it straightened out.


"your best insurance is an insurance broker"

Dealing direct with an insurance company through an agent (like
StateFarm, Geico, Allstate et al) they hold all the cards.
Dealing with a broker - particularly a fairly large broker with a
large "book" of insurance puts some of the cards in YOUR hand. The
broker works for YOU, not the insurance company. An agent works for
the insurance company - not for you.

When you use the title "agent", you need to be more specific. There are
"captive agents" and "independent agents".

According the Investopedia, an independent agent does not work for "the"
insurance company.

"Definition of 'Independent Agent'

AKA an "insurance broker"

An insurance agent that sells insurance policies provided by several different
insurance companies rather than a single insurance company. An independent
agent receives commissions for the policies that he or she sells, and is not
considered an employee of a specific insurance company."

Granted, a "broker" may be even more independent than an independent agent,
and a broker, by law, has a fiduciary duty to the client. However, in some
cases, depending on the relationship between the policy holder and the
independent agent, some courts have ruled that the agent was acting as a
broker and could therefore have a fiduciary duty to the client.

In any case, my agent is an independent and offers insurance products from a
number of carriers. The mere fact that she called me to tell me my rates
were going down by ~40% is enough for me to continue our relationship.

You are dealing with a "broker" - a wise move.

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 10:36:12 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 09:15 PM, Snuffy "Hub Cap" McKinney wrote:
"philo" wrote in message ...
On 02/03/2016 07:22 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
]


snip

Sounds like no personal banker, lawyer, accountant.



You are correct, I have no personal banker, accountant or financial
advisor. (Did hire a lawyer to do my will though)

I hired a lawyer once. He ripped me off. Now he's RIP himself.



The only other time I hired a lawyer was when I got divorced.
since it was what they say a "friendly" divorce the fee was just $175

I figured it was easier just to agree with her.

A friend of mine spent $5000 on a lawyer and ended up having to give
everything to his ex-wife anyway

Everything except for $5000.

philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 07:22 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
]


snip

Sounds like no personal banker, lawyer, accountant.



You are correct, I have no personal banker, accountant or financial
advisor. (Did hire a lawyer to do my will though)

A few times advisors have called on me and since I have been investing
in the stock market for over 50 years and have been quite successful , I
was the one who ended up giving them advice.

Started when I was 13 years old and my dad of course invested for me.

Mentioned this before somewhere but will repeat:


Choosing a good stock is not that difficult, the hard part is having the
years of experience to know you can ride something out. VIZ: A cast iron
stomach.

No matter what, the stock market has it's ups and downs and one must
learn /not/ to panic and sell when things drop.


I started my daughter in the same tradition and she started calling the
shots at even an earlier age then me. As a result the few thousand
dollars worth of her childhood birthday and Christmas money grew
sufficiently to put herself through college and graduate debt free.

I gave her a little help with car repairs etc but she has been damn
independent.



So you must be by now for sure a multi-millionaire?