Absolutely brutal - 5/5

[mathjak107]

You are boring the shit out of me .

No I never said a 1.58% draw from vti is dangerous nor did anyone say that is what we are talking about ..there are no specific amounts discussed so it is all just general advice .

Stop pulling what you are saying I said out of your ass

I am tired of responding too your argumentative posts . I will not respond to you …bye

[jalanlong]

One thing I just picked up from a random walk down wall street regarding dividends.

It is actually preferred for a company to buy back shares instead of distributing dividends because you pay less tax on capital gains versus dividends.


I don't have proof right now but I expect it is now rare for a company to start paying dividends if they had not previously because of this tax advantage.

In theory yes. But in reality studies have shown companies are horrible at timing stock buybacks. And one study showed the companies who do the most stock buybacks in a given year underperformed the market as a whole on a pretty consistent basis.

[dockinGA]

You are boring the shit out of me .

No I never said. A 1.80% draws is dangerous nor did anyone say that is what we are talking about ..there are no specific amounts discussed so it is all just general advice

I am tired of responding too your argumentative posts . I will not respond to you …bye

Well, my sincere hope is that you never respond to anyone else's posts on this site either. Let's just recap what your 'input' has been to the site over the last few days.

1. Told a poster asking questions about bond ETF vs individual bonds that 'Funds also can do something you can’t do with individual bonds and that is called ride the yield curve.' Linked to an article in that post that said in fact that you can do the exact same thing with individual bonds. When confronted about the contradiction, you said 'You can do it the same as funds do', literally one post later.
2. Posted portfolio YTD information, from another website, that seems to be demonstrably false, not just on the YTD number but on the change from one week to the next. Your portfolio results showed that the PP lost 2% over the past week, when in fact it was mostly flat. When confronted about this information, you said 'Got a gripe ,. Complain to them , not me', which might be OK if YOU weren't the one bringing the misinformation to the board and reciting it to try to make YOUR point.
3. Hijacked a thread about someone's relative into a discussion about safe withdrawal rates by misunderstanding the point of the discussion, or willfully disregarding what others were talking about so you could steer the discussion to your apparently self professed area of expertise. Tried to turn the discussion into a straw man argument of someone trying to live solely off a 6% paying dividend stock, which has absolutely nothing to do with the original discussion, and then argued with 2 people who were trying to point out that you were discussing things different from the original discussion.

[mathjak107]

Others can decide if what i said was wrong .
You are just argumentative and a dick .

You clearly implied I said something that I didn’t. .

Clearly don’t understand spending down to live is based on portfolio value not dividend spending

Clearly like to harp on what you can construe as false but is still quite fact .

Like i said I am done responding to you from here on in

[joypog]

I don't get why the poor relative has gotten so much flack.

The relative in question is doing so well that he doesn't ever look at his portfolio, so lets assume that his pre-retirement savings was quite healthy.

Looking at on the longterm trends it seems that the SP500 typically yields about 4.4% - but has been giving much lower dividends lately.

So he's doing much better than the 4% rule.

We all agree dividend stocks are not an optimal strategy, but it seems pretty safe at the moment given the low percentage. As long as he is buying and holding a wide range of stocks, I'd say it's a better strategy than jumping in and out of the market.

Plus he's also not wasting his retirement on internet forums!

[dualstow]

[Smith1776]

Indeed, given how low dividend yields still are, I'm jealous of anyone that can live off of dividend payments alone.

It sounds like a nice "problem" to have.

[dockinGA]

Others can decide if what i said was wrong .
You are just argumentative and a dick .

You clearly implied I said something that I didn’t. .

Clearly don’t understand spending down to live is based on portfolio value not dividend spending

Clearly like to harp on what you can construe as false but is still quite fact .

Like i said I am done responding to you from here on in

All I'm doing is saving everyone else the trouble of wading through your plethora of posts, highlighted by your poor communication skills, to ultimately reach the same conclusion that I and others have: You're almost always wrong, and when you're not 'wrong', it's just because you've changed the subject of the thread to bring up something else or stated something so obvious that everyone else already knows it anyway.

Now, to address this latest harangue from you regarding my understanding of dividends vs overall portfolio value draw:
1. I completely understand dividend investing/drawing.
2. I completely understand withdrawing based on a certain percent of your portfolio.
3. I completely understand safe withdrawal rates.
4. I completely understand the differences between the three aforementioned concepts, and also how they're intricately linked.
5. I completely understand that you are cognitively unable to understand anything other than the first 3 points separately. Therefore, you have incorrectly steered this discussion into something that is completely unnecessary, because you heard something that no one else was saying due to inability to grasp anything other than memorized talking points. You can disagree with this if you'd like, but that's fine. You've stated far, far more demonstrably false things just in the past 2 days than I have on this website in all of my posts, and there's no denying that fact. Your bloviating is probably overwhelming for the investing rubes over on city-data, but it's not fooling anybody here.

I'll put this in terms that might make a little more sense to you. It's possible to be a drummer with great technical skill, but be so bad at putting it all together in a musically entertaining way that no one ever wants to hear them play drums. Just because you can play a few drum fills like John Bonham or Neil Peart doesn't make you John Bonham or Neil Peart. Maybe it will get you to a point where you can play drums in a couple of regional shows for the reunion tour of some washed up rock band, but no one is going to walk across the street specifically to hear your drumming. Memorizing investing 'talking points' and regurgitating them one unconnected sentence at a time does not an investing savant make.

[Smith1776]

mathjak, I respect your knowledge and your contributions to discussions, but I must admit that I agree with the assertion that you have a propensity for derailing threads.

[dockinGA]

mathjak, I respect your knowledge and your contributions to discussions, but I must admit that I agree with the assertion that you have a propensity for derailing threads.

Just looking at his posts from the past couple of days:
1. He's posted a link to an article (that didn't really address the original poster's question it might be added) from which he made an incorrect conclusion and summary statement, which he directly contradicted in the next post. This is not knowledge.
2. He's posted portfolio YTD information that was incorrect, and when pressed on the fact blamed it on the website instead of accepting any of the blame for posting bad information. More importantly, he did not make any attempt to correct the bad information he posted previously. This is most certainly not knowledge.
3. He derailed a conversation spouting off information almost completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. This is spewing knowledge in the wrong time and/or place, showing an inability to properly use the information/knowledge that he does possess.

He has lots of go-to phrases and words that might sound like knowledge, but most of what he says is misinformation hiding behind 'big words'. As I see it, his contributions to threads are almost exclusively negative. He's exhibit A for the Dunning-Kruger effect, incapable of envisioning a world with anything other than his set of known knowns, practically incapable of admitting the existence of known unknowns, much less unknown unknowns. To top it off, when confronted with hard data countering his non-data driven viewpoints, he hides his head in the sand and treats that information as an unknown known.

[dockinGA]

OK, I can't let this one go. This one post possibly highlights the limits of your critical thinking skills more than any other.

You are boring the shit out of me .

So you're saying you splatter word salad all over everybody's threads out of boredom? Let's hope I can bore you so much you run out of $#@# soon.

No I never said a 1.58% draw from vti is dangerous nor did anyone say that is what we are talking about

The point of bringing this up is this, pretty clearly obvious for someone who thinks a little bit before blabbering on again. If jalanlong's relative has been with this strategy for a long time, which it sounds like he has, then he's probably in a good mix of blue chip type dividend paying stocks. If so, he's probably in something that has a dividend yield not too terribly far from the yield of a total market ETF such as VTI. I assume it's higher, but probably still less than the 4% safe withdrawal rate that you so frequently cite (that fails if the first 10-15 years sees 2% or less growth, as I've heard you mention 10k times). You then proceed to hijack the thread talking about the dangers of this investing approach since it's not based on total portfolio value. My point is that he's almost certainly withdrawing less of his portfolio than 4% if all he's doing is living off the dividends, and the rest is going to continued price appreciation. A pretty simple concept, and a simple question asked which you were unable or unwilling to answer.

..there are no specific amounts discussed so it is all just general advice .

This is false, and is in fact something you admit to in another post on this thread. Here's the origin of the 6% comment.

Just because I can put my money in a stock paying 6% doesn’t mean I should be spending at a 6% draw rate

And here is where you admit to bringing up the 6%.

I said it .. as an example.

Stop pulling what you are saying I said out of your ass

Hopefully at this point the reader will understand the absurdity of this comment.

I am tired of responding too your argumentative posts . I will not respond to you …bye

Spoken like someone who no longer has a leg to stand on.

[seajay]

Others can decide if what i said was wrong .
You are just argumentative and a dick .

You clearly implied I said something that I didn’t. .

Clearly don’t understand spending down to live is based on portfolio value not dividend spending

Clearly like to harp on what you can construe as false but is still quite fact .

Like i said I am done responding to you from here on in

All I'm doing is saving everyone else the trouble of wading through your plethora of posts, highlighted by your poor communication skills, to ultimately reach the same conclusion that I and others have: You're almost always wrong, and when you're not 'wrong', it's just because you've changed the subject of the thread to bring up something else or stated something so obvious that everyone else already knows it anyway.

Now, to address this latest harangue from you regarding my understanding of dividends vs overall portfolio value draw:
1. I completely understand dividend investing/drawing.
2. I completely understand withdrawing based on a certain percent of your portfolio.
3. I completely understand safe withdrawal rates.
4. I completely understand the differences between the three aforementioned concepts, and also how they're intricately linked.
5. I completely understand that you are cognitively unable to understand anything other than the first 3 points separately. Therefore, you have incorrectly steered this discussion into something that is completely unnecessary, because you heard something that no one else was saying due to inability to grasp anything other than memorized talking points. You can disagree with this if you'd like, but that's fine. You've stated far, far more demonstrably false things just in the past 2 days than I have on this website in all of my posts, and there's no denying that fact. Your bloviating is probably overwhelming for the investing rubes over on city-data, but it's not fooling anybody here.

I'll put this in terms that might make a little more sense to you. It's possible to be a drummer with great technical skill, but be so bad at putting it all together in a musically entertaining way that no one ever wants to hear them play drums. Just because you can play a few drum fills like John Bonham or Neil Peart doesn't make you John Bonham or Neil Peart. Maybe it will get you to a point where you can play drums in a couple of regional shows for the reunion tour of some washed up rock band, but no one is going to walk across the street specifically to hear your drumming. Memorizing investing 'talking points' and regurgitating them one unconnected sentence at a time does not an investing savant make.

Lighten up guys/gals.

Love this drummers techique/skills https://www.youtube.com/embed/FqJdzYY_Fas?autoplay=1

[jalanlong]

I don't get why the poor relative has gotten so much flack.

The relative in question is doing so well that he doesn't ever look at his portfolio, so lets assume that his pre-retirement savings was quite healthy.

Looking at on the longterm trends it seems that the SP500 typically yields about 4.4% - but has been giving much lower dividends lately.

So he's doing much better than the 4% rule.

We all agree dividend stocks are not an optimal strategy, but it seems pretty safe at the moment given the low percentage. As long as he is buying and holding a wide range of stocks, I'd say it's a better strategy than jumping in and out of the market.

Plus he's also not wasting his retirement on internet forums!

His portfolio seems to be made up of what you would consider “old fashioned” dividend stocks. Companies like 3M, JNJ, Coke, Tobacco Companies etc. His yield is probably 2x the market yield. Lord only knows what his yield on cost is!

[vnatale]

Love this drummers techique/skills https://www.youtube.com/embed/FqJdzYY_Fas?autoplay=1

Definitely got much better after listening awhile. He has significant drumming skills.

[dockinGA]

I don't get why the poor relative has gotten so much flack.

The relative in question is doing so well that he doesn't ever look at his portfolio, so lets assume that his pre-retirement savings was quite healthy.

Looking at on the longterm trends it seems that the SP500 typically yields about 4.4% - but has been giving much lower dividends lately.

So he's doing much better than the 4% rule.

We all agree dividend stocks are not an optimal strategy, but it seems pretty safe at the moment given the low percentage. As long as he is buying and holding a wide range of stocks, I'd say it's a better strategy than jumping in and out of the market.

Plus he's also not wasting his retirement on internet forums!

His portfolio seems to be made up of what you would consider “old fashioned” dividend stocks. Companies like 3M, JNJ, Coke, Tobacco Companies etc. His yield is probably 2x the market yield. Lord only knows what his yield on cost is!

Thank you for confirming this information. As I mentioned in a previous comment, this was just yet another straw man argument from Mathjak. Pointing out that your relative was doing things wrong and should stick with a 4% s.w.r. (fails unless real rate of return is 10-15% for the first 2 years(TM), or maybe I got my numbers mixed up but what difference does it make I'll just pretend like it never happened contradict myself in my next post and then argue and throw insults to the next person that happens to call me out on my misinformation), when in fact your relative's actual withdrawal rate is most likely less than 4%. Whether he's getting his less than 4% withdrawals from dividends or selling stocks matters only in the world of taxation.

Many of the people on this board need to wake up to the realization of what Mathjak really is, what he knows, what he doesn't know, and how he applies and misapplies his knowledge. It makes me a shunned poster here to point it out, but it is what it is. I'd rather be hated than allow his falsehoods, straw mans, inability to stay on topic, diversion to pet talking points, etc. to go unchecked. As soon as he stops posting incessantly and hijacking threads, we'll get back to normal discussions, with actual relevant information being shared.

[Hal]

To keep Smithy happy

This is how the Aussie GoldSmith portfolio is going

[Smith1776]

To keep Smithy happy

This is how the Aussie GoldSmith portfolio is going

Yaaaaay!