Ham Hockers

I believe that would make your entity a CFC (Controlled Foreign Corp), which is another can of worms.

This was a good one http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2015/03/11/392381112/episode-609-the-curse-of-the-black-lotus Reminded me of Krugman's baby sitting co-op.

Marty Whitman. He's written plenty.

The NYT highlighted part of an exchange in 2009, which I found both hilarious and frightening. In hindsight, maybe it's amazing how much Bernanke was able to push through, given the opposition. “I am going to regret this, but I am going to ask you a question,” Mr. Bernanke said to Mr. Lacker. “Do you think the United States economy is at a Pareto efficient point at this moment?” “Probably,” the Richmond Fed president replied. “With the best position we can be at right now?” Mr. Bernanke continued. “Roughly speaking. All constraints taken on board.” Bernanke continued, “The question was, Is the United States economy at a Pareto efficient point at this moment? And the answer was ‘yes.’ Okay. So that is obviously a different view.”

http://berkshirehathawayfraud.blogspot.com/2012/11/berkshire-hathaway-stock-fraudincome.html

WTF http://imgur.com/HKy39ed That is his business card lol. No joke. It's pretty funny when someone doesn't realize he's acting like an ass.

WTF

It can absolutely make a difference. Is the manager generating enough fees in a base case that he is reasonably satisfied? In a downside case that runs several years is he making enough to cover his normal living expenses? You want the manager managing your assets and not taking too much time worrying about raising capital.

The Amex everyday and everyday preferred are quite good if you travel on airlines that are partners with Amex. The Everyday is free I believe.

Nicely done. Do you find Fido to be accurate in computing the returns? I think it is fairly accurate. I figured it out myself a few years ago and got reasonably close to the Fidelity number. I take out money rarely, if ever, and only add a few times per year. My accounts are all for separate things (IRA, taxable brokerage, ROTH IRA, my wife's ROTH IRA, the kids UTMA accounts, etc, so I never move money back and forth between them, just deposit money from the outside into the appropriate account. I think the calculation is pretty straight forward. As long as you don't invest in international equities they are accurate. If you have an account with $1000 and invest $200 in a German stock Fidelity counts the $200 as a withdrawal and only computes performance on the remaining $800. If you sell the stock and put it back in to dollars it's considered a deposit. I keep a lot of my cash in foreign cash, which to Fidelity means it has disappeared. I think Fidelity also records dividends on a cash basis? I think most pro return figures including indices will be on an accrued basis.

The fact is, most people, even those of us on this site who are reasonably knowledgeable and smart, will not beat the index over any long period of time, and certainly not consistently. That some people think it's easy sort of horrifies me. My sense is most non-professionals here realize this, but are happy to invest on their own because it's a) fun and b) isn't so costly (in terms of underperformance) that it will be disastrous to their lives. For the pros, I would say some are above average, and most are just trying to make a living, like everyone else. I strongly disagree. My goal and the goal of most long term investors is to beat the market overall, not necessarily beat it consistently (the word you used) Firstly, when I think of someone beating the S&P 500 I think of a graph showing performance starting say at age 28, when that person reaches 50 the graph will show results pulling away from S&P 500. That is NOT to say that the person beats the S&P 500 the majority of the years, he can lag the S&P500 say 25/40 years yet still pull away. The goal is to retire or die with the most money! If there are a huge set of people trying to beat the market then some are able to beat it using my definition above, who are those people, they are in the minority but they exist somewhere. When you say it is almost impossible to beat it, you are probably thinking of the same arguements are the efficient market people. Warren Buffett debunked that. I think that the majority of people in this forum know they can do it, but they can't be bothered bothering doing what is required long term so they instead cut some corners, and thus may wind up failing. I think you're reading my post incorrectly. I never said nobody can beat the market. I said I thought most will not. I also never said it is near impossible to beat the market. I never said the goal of long term investors is to beat the market consistently. I only emphasized that I thought that was even harder than beating the market over a long period of time, which I think you agree with. Overall I was responding to the idea that it's easy to beat the market. I think it's tough.

I'm would suggest learning about the various points systems and perks. You can actually accumulate significant monetary value by knowing which credit cards to open and when and which types of points are valuable and why. Check out websites like flyertalk or the points guy

The fact is, most people, even those of us on this site who are reasonably knowledgeable and smart, will not beat the index over any long period of time, and certainly not consistently. That some people think it's easy sort of horrifies me. My sense is most non-professionals here realize this, but are happy to invest on their own because it's a) fun and b) isn't so costly (in terms of underperformance) that it will be disastrous to their lives. For the pros, I would say some are above average, and most are just trying to make a living, like everyone else.

I guess making VRSN and RSG my top two positions would get me laughed at around here.

I would bet the people who are high spenders here save a lot more than others may assume.

Biggest expense for me by far is housing. NYC and all. Housing (including utilities) alone puts me in the $100k area.

Sorry I clicked the wrong button. Kill the 450k expense entry!

True. But the Mr. Money Mustache lifestyle is probably more like retiring on 600k, so 4 million is more like Mr. Money Monocle :) Ha! Good point

How much a person feels he needs to retire is totally up to him. There is no right number. And not everyone wants to live the Mr. Money Mustache lifestyle.

Hold cash until your bank charges a negative interest rate.

This is not really about the stock, but I thought this podcast episode would be of interest to others. http://www.npr.org/2015/01/01/374332473/why-cutting-a-ceo-s-pay-can-be-very-difficult

Short and sweet. Also has Ben Edelmen near the end (I presume the same Harvard prof who had the Chinese delivery ruckus a month or two ago) http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2014/04/16/303735386/episode-532-the-wild-west-of-the-internet

I think it is now over 20% in the US, 45% in the UK and I have read (although can't quite believe) that it is 60% in France. Supporting data on the U.S.?

Are you sure it isn't still $250k per owner per institution per ownership type? All your individual account together gets $250k protection. All your spousal accounts together gets another $250k. The joint account with the spouse gets another $250k. So you and your spouse could get a total of $750k protection. But that is per bank, right? From the FDIC site: "The standard insurance amount is $250,000 per depositor, per insured bank, for each account ownership category."

I haven't tried Shake Shack (never heard of them), nor Swensons. But McDs and Burger King shouldn't be on anyone's list of good burgers. I get nauseated even thinking of them. Wendy's, which didn't make your list is at least edible and Red Robin is really good, although not fast food. My list would be: 1) Five Guys 2) Red Robin 3) In n Out 9) Wendy's (yes I know I skipped 4-8, but Wendy's isn't close to the others). Yeah, sorry I should have been clear. This is a list of places that I've tried (though I forgot Wendy's). Not that I think these are the best burger places.