Uccmal

That is probably my ultimate goal. Unfortunately, I live with others who have their own needs and wants. Having a cash hoard is a little like a honey pot sitting around to be wasted on home renovations and so forth. I sort of use a line of credit to smooth my cash flow. Also, I still carry margin debt, so it makes a cash hoard difficult. I want it all dispatched before interest rates (if/when) rise too high to service. a bit of colour: 1 - LIRA - locked in RSP - cant touch for another 10 years - some bragging for writser: (started at 23 k 9 years ago - now worth 100 k) - un levered, no cash can be added. 2- Regular RSP - no longer contribute to it. Future tax avoidance in mind. I may start to withdraw from it next year to minimize future taxes. 3- Modest pension coming from 13 yrs. with my most recent employer - can take cash, or leave and collect at 60 or 65, at assorted different rates (probably will leave it - it is held external to the employer). 4- Kids RESP mostly fully funded based on reasonable return rates and age of kids. 5- TFSA - BTW - dont ever buy options in a TFSA - Losses aren't tax deductible. My TFSA is fully funded and up about 30% total return. 6- CDN/US margin accounts - I carry the debt right now in the US side which is convenient as the CDN dollar rises - the debt shrinks without me doing a thing. 7- Of course there is home equity 8- If things get really dire there is Old age security, CPP etc. I don't expect I will ever actually see this on an after tax basis. That's sort of how I work things. I have a similar system for my Wife's accounts but less money.

Your last line there sums up the issues I have with total return. I am now in a position, at least temporarily, where I need the regular income to fund my life. As I mention above I have deliberately chosen stocks in the last year that pay good dividends, and will keep paying them, with a strong value bent. I have been investing for 20 years. That's long enough to have seen my portfolio drop 40-50% a couple of times! and 70% once. Writser, Would you want to be selling stock into a 50% correction? A prolonged correction? - I have been down 20% or more for a couple of years at a stretch. I don't know about your Country, but I can make up to 60-70k in dividends without paying any tax (Canadian Dividends - US/EU are counted as income). So, combined I can have 30-40 k, considered income, and 25-30 considered dividends, and pay no tax. Conversely, capital gains are taxed less favourably - they count as income regardless of the source.

Yes, I am still employed. I don't think I will change my investing approach when I retire. I have a chunk of cash that I'd use for "living". If I'd need more cash, I'd sell some stocks. Obviously, people could argue that I might have to sell stocks at bad time. However, if one has a chunk of cash (or liquid fixed income securities), one can adjust the selling somewhat. I also might have some divvy stocks. I am not against them, I am just agnostic. Anyway, a lot of people do what you do. My objection was only to the implication that everyone (or everyone smart/successful/etc. :) ) has to do it. I was agnostic until a year or so ago on whether companies paid dividends. In this market at these prices I want to see the cash coming.

Uccmal, this is nice, and congratulations also. Is the dividend yield on your portfolio comparable to what you could get with a passive approach, say with like VIG, VYM, VTV from Vanguard; or with a near-passive approach like a Dogs of the Dow strategy? Could you see yourself going this passive route? I've toyed with this idea myself (but decided not to until I get too bored or demented to pick stocks actively, like maybe when I'm over 90?) Way better - 5.0 - 6.0% on cost . I am already going the passive route in some sense. I have set up enough dividend payers to cover living expenses. Any dividend growth or good deals I get from here are gravy. I have to get my Wife retired now (if thats possible - she loves her job - it's a sickness....)

Cloud, At what point do we stop worrying about diet and fitness, and just enjoy things with some degree of moderation. Worrying about it is just more stress, right? If you follow research about stress and its affect on telomeres lengths, that seems to say alot. People who care for a spouse, disabled child, or parent full time without a break have been shown to suffer from chronic stress and it reduces their health and well being immensely. Sorry to say, you shoot yourself on the foot with this. Moderate amount of a bad thing is still a bad thing. Preventing suffering doesn't cause me any stress. I don't worry about preventing suffering. I just take actions to the best of my ability. I don't feel stressful about: e.g. eating healthy, exercising,not drinking any alcohol (meaning no chance of getting in a car accident under influence of alcohol), avoiding smoking cigarettes, no texting and driving. I do see smokers become stressful when they are suddenly cut off from cigarettes. The ability to say no is a key indicator of success in all areas of life. Check out Stanford marshmallow experiment. Now let's talk about stress ... Some people don't care about their financial health and physical health. For example, when they lived carelessly for their whole life without any consequences. Then they reach age of 60,70, after an operation, let's say to take out a gallbladder after a gallbladder attack, they suddenly can barely walk, and experience urine incontinence. (What causes formation of gallstone?) Or worse, they have cancer. Now, because they are not financially independent, they will need their children, probably at their 30s, to become care giver. That's endless medications, doctor appointments. Meanwhile their children are working full time and use up their 2 weeks vacations just to go to their parents doctor appointments. At this stage of life, their children are probably starting to think about or just started raising their own family. If their children don't have high enough income, they are been sandwiched between their own family and their parents. They are called sandwich generations. Some even are so stressful that they can't have their own family. I take care of my financial health and physical health to ensure my children will not become sandwich generations. I am not sure what you mean that I shoot myself in the foot. What you have done is argue with me from a sample of one, you. There are no guarantees whatsoever in this world. I have watched enough healthy people die young due to bad luck: cancer, stroke, heart attack, etc. Conversely, I know enough people who have done nothing but abuse their bodies and go on and on, in near perfect health - alot more than you'd think. Yeah, you can sway the odds in your favour, but only a certain amount. Somewhat related: There was an article in Bloomberg today showing a study of wealth and health. I cant seem to get the link. The results are clear. The wealthier you are, the better your health. Have a look at the London Trolley Bus study sometime: They compared drivers who sit all day to ticket takers, who move about all day. The workforce is unionized so a driver is likely to remain a driver and a ticket taker a ticket taker. Ticket takers live longer healthier lives regardless of any other factors: diet, smoking, other exercise. The effect of regular full body movement on health is being borne out in more studies. The more you move the better your health. People waste too much time focussed on the wrong things.

Al, When you said "good to be in Canada in this case", are you referring to the tax-advantaged treatment of dividends from Canadian companies? I would really love to know some good Canadian dividend payers; I have a pretty bad record investing in Canadian companies in general. Yes. I have held in the past and rebought recently: Russell Metals -'its running back up fast; Seaspan (US) see thread - its running up again; Mullen Transport - I love this company - got hammered down late in 2014 with oil panic; Newer: First National - my mortgage lender and the biggest in Canada. My Equifax score is 850 out of 900 to give you an idea of their customers - < 5% subprime. Closely held. Bird Construction - small position - I am still studying it. Royal Bank - small position - not especially cheap but they have never, ever cut their dividend bought some AT&T today (US obviously) - small - a work in progress. Sirius XM Canada - xsr - held by Sirius XM. This one pukes cash. I am a little hesitant here as I dont completely grasp the business, and the potential competition from streaming. The biggest positions are SSW, MTL, and FN. The conversion of US dividends to CDN is working really well in RRSP accounts. JPM and WFC common - more for cap gains potential than dividends. .thats about it.

Like Buffett, for example. ;D I never bought a stock because it paid or did not pay dividends. Not planning to do this in the future either. There was a thread about this a while back. Buffett does not pay dividends but his holdings do, and he seems to insist on it. Note much of what he's done recently is preferred issues that generate a lot of income. I don't want to hog the thread. I agree that some prefs and fixed income securities are attractive investments and I do buy them on yield (to maturity usually, though there are exceptions). But I don't buy them for income and I don't buy common stocks for yield. I am also not trying to say that people are wrong if they do. I just don't agree with your generalization. :) Another comment on this: Perhaps. I don't have disdain for them. I just don't care. :) On other forums though, there is a huge influx of people into divvie payers. So much so that I am afraid of a bubble in divvie stocks. They were great investments in 2009-2010, but I wonder if now they are getting overvalued even more than general market. I did not do a non-anecdotal study though. Best I think its a contextual thing. When you start to live off your investments you want those stable dividends. You still work for the man, right? Some of my best common stock investments have been dividend payers. There not all bad. I am not yet prepared to go overseas for value in any significant way. I would need a better brokerage setup. Something to work on.

Reasonable assessment. There are certainly no easy pickings, if there ever were. I have been liquidating Leaps in favour of dividend payers. My major prerequisite is companies that can fund their dividend, even in a downturn, and have raised the dividend sometime within the last year or two. I am willing to overlook a cut to the divvy in 2008/09 if it has been bought back up. No dieing businesses in this lot. I am now able to completely live off the dividends - good to be in Canada in this case.

Of course INTJs are more likely to answer the OP question and voluntarily do the test....

I did the test the first time 15+ years ago. No surprise here - INTJ; No surprise as the board goes. The book "Do What You Are" gave the example of Munger as an INTJ - reverse engineered by the authors Tieger and Tieger. Buffett was something else.

It wouldn't make a difference whether it was cane sugar or corn sugar. Both have fructose and glucose. Its the volumes people consume these days and the lack of offsets, such as regular full body mobility. The subject of Buffett's diet comes up now and again. From what I read he is kind of weird about food. I'll steer away from diagnosing him. Schroeder mentioned alot about this in the biography. One thing I recall is that when he wanted to lose weight he would switch to Diet Coke and eat next to nothing until he reached his goal. I would say he meets the other 80% of the equation for health and longevity fairly well: lucky genes (both sisters are alive and his mother lived into her 90s), reasonably active, and doesn't smoke or drink. His stress level has been discussed before. He seems to live a normal sort of life in the stress regard - I think he causes others alot of stress. Cloud, At what point do we stop worrying about diet and fitness, and just enjoy things with some degree of moderation. Worrying about it is just more stress, right? If you follow research about stress and its affect on telomeres lengths, that seems to say alot. People who care for a spouse, disabled child, or parent full time without a break have been shown to suffer from chronic stress and it reduces their health and well being immensely.

Well, I am not convinced. As you know, We, whom were on this board, went through one of these a few years back and came out stronger. Do you have a plan Phoenix? I for one have been buying dividend payers in an assortment of industries. It is interesting to note that in 2008/2009 the majority of companies did not cut their dividends - they didn't raise them, but they didn't cut either. The major income hits were among US financials. At the same time I have been exiting most of my leveraged bets (Leaps), slowly. I cant speak to CDn. Real Estate. It is certainly frothy but has never dropped by 50% - see above evidence. I try to get my head around the scenario you propose. With central bank ammunition used up, the outcome is nothing short of worldwide disaster. Nothing will be safe, certainly not cash. This time around no one will be buying stocks because we would be in a deflationary spiral. I guess that is why the fed. is unwilling to shrink its balance sheet or raise interest rates in any hurry. I also think the Fed. and worldwide governents want to inflate their way out of debt. Like Y2k, there is enough people worrying about it to make it a non-event. This wasn't the case in 2007, when no one seemed worried about anything. I had SPY puts by summer 2008, that I sold out way, way too early. I am not seeing that as necessary right now.

Toronto Real house prices from TREB: http://www.wheretrustbegins.com/4a_custpage_9237.html ~ 30 % drop in 89/90 Anecdotally, I recall headlines of 50% drops in some areas such as the Beaches.

Canada wide: 89/90 about 25% drop: http://www.macleans.ca/economy/realestateeconomy/a-canadian-housing-chart-that-puts-the-bubble-in-perspective/

What data are you using. I found one data set that suggested a roughly 30% drop for Canada.

I agreed - although I think real estate in Canada is probably not quite the same as the tech bubble where some assets were priced at avg of 165x p/e multiples - and the market participants bought using margin - I believe the high end real estates in Canada are bought with cash... and many 'average' condos were bought with more stringent downpayment and insurance requirements. That's not to say a bubble is not here and won't burst... but I have a hard time seeing that's the same as the tech bubble. Gary During the tech wreck, even the Queen of England was trading stocks. Everyone was doing it, except for a few notables WB, Prem, etc.. We are seeing global inflation of all assets simultaneously. There is a possibility that all assets will reverse simultaneously and very quickly. Long tail events occur when people are not expecting them. BLACK SWAN!! Today everyone is convinced that a 50% drop in Canadian RE is not possible. Is a 50% drop reasonable in light of the global asset inflation over the past 7 years? What if everything drops at the same time? Will global funds pour into Canada for refuge? Who knows??? BLACK SWANS are possible and very few are prepared to deal with such an outcome. Personally it looks like pick up quarters in front of a steam roller. Not worth the risk. Okay, we had a generational macro event in 2008/09. As a result the financial system is in better shape than it has been in decades. What asset prices are inflated, exactly? You keep saying this but provide no evidence. Commodities are generally depressed. Europe Inc is generally depressed. Japan Inc. is depressed. By far the most important asset of all is running at 40% of its peak. I agree with you that CDn. real estate is frothy. However, as I have asserted above it is a subsector of the economy restricted to mortgage lenders. Will something take it down eventually. Of course, but 50%. When did this last happen? 1989. House prices dropped 50% in TOR You are correct. It was, however, not universally that dramatic across Canada.

I agreed - although I think real estate in Canada is probably not quite the same as the tech bubble where some assets were priced at avg of 165x p/e multiples - and the market participants bought using margin - I believe the high end real estates in Canada are bought with cash... and many 'average' condos were bought with more stringent downpayment and insurance requirements. That's not to say a bubble is not here and won't burst... but I have a hard time seeing that's the same as the tech bubble. Gary During the tech wreck, even the Queen of England was trading stocks. Everyone was doing it, except for a few notables WB, Prem, etc.. We are seeing global inflation of all assets simultaneously. There is a possibility that all assets will reverse simultaneously and very quickly. Long tail events occur when people are not expecting them. BLACK SWAN!! Today everyone is convinced that a 50% drop in Canadian RE is not possible. Is a 50% drop reasonable in light of the global asset inflation over the past 7 years? What if everything drops at the same time? Will global funds pour into Canada for refuge? Who knows??? BLACK SWANS are possible and very few are prepared to deal with such an outcome. Personally it looks like pick up quarters in front of a steam roller. Not worth the risk. Okay, we had a generational macro event in 2008/09. As a result the financial system is in better shape than it has been in decades. What asset prices are inflated, exactly? You keep saying this but provide no evidence. Commodities are generally depressed. Europe Inc is generally depressed. Japan Inc. is depressed. By far the most important asset of all is running at 40% of its peak. I agree with you that CDn. real estate is frothy. However, as I have asserted above it is a subsector of the economy restricted to mortgage lenders. Will something take it down eventually. Of course, but 50%. When did this last happen?

Uccmal, how did you get TD to give you a HELOC up to 80% of total LTV with your first mortgage NOT being with TD (i.e., with First National)? In my very recent experience, every big-5 Canadian bank refuses to go second on a property with first mortgage that is not with them, including TD (had a phone conversation with them). The only firm that agreed to do it was Home Capital group, but they cap total LTV (first+HELOC) at 65% of appraised property value. I dont know. I had one before the remortgage that was discharged at that time. I hold all of my brokerage accounts with TD, and Visa cards with TD. Maybe they are worried about losing that business? So, I have been a long time customer... 30 years total. Your comment plays to my thesis that the big Canadian banks aren't going to be left holding the ball in a housing slowdown though. Its the smaller finance companies of which there are dozens out there.

In a word... No. I just went through two separate processes in the last 7 months. One was remortgaging our house at lower rates with First National Lp (Canada's biggest mortgage lender). The other was setting up a new Heloc with TD Bank. First National required proof of wage, employment, and assessed the house for its value before approving the remortgage. The house was assessed for 950k, my estimate on its resale is 1050 to 1100 k. They cap the amount they will lend at 80%. We remortgaged with room to spare. I like to operate with a Heloc to smooth my investment income that I rely on. We went to Td to get a Heloc set up. Again, we had to provide full income verification, and TD sent their own house assessor. It was again assessed for 950 k, within seven months of the last assessment. The capped the total borrowable at 80% including First National's portion. My Wife and I have Equifax credit scores of 800 and 854. 900 is a perfect score. 90 plus Defaults among those with higher than 800 run at less than 1%. We had to go through alot of hoops to get this all done. My conclusion: The big 5/6 Canadian Banks are unlikely to get stung very much in a real estate crash, if there is one. First National is also unlikely to get stung very much either. If housing does crash their stocks will get very cheap for no reason. Ry, TD, BMO, BNs, CM, and Fn are all on my long term watch list. I have even dipped my toes in the water buying some First National and Ry recently. This is part of my strategy of shifting some of my assets to Canadian dividend paying companies to generate income. If I were going to short something in relation to a Real Estate crash I would look at mortgage lenders who work the subprime space. There are some smaller publicly traded ones. I dont have any suggestions in particular as I dont short as a rule, and I am not looking in this space for watch list candidates - I suspect some of these will get wiped out but cant say which. In part of my due diligence For Fn, I googled under numerous search terms for Canadian Housing lenders for people with weak credit and came up with a few names - First National did not appear. Incidentally, I have been a customer of First National for 11 years since they were a smaller outfit, and they sailed right through 2008/2009 unscathed. It only took me 7 years or so to pull the trigger and start paying myself back on my mortgage.

The problem is the rice and noodles that are consumed now. There is nothing wrong with Whole grain unhusked rice, or noodles made from wheat straight off the farm in Italy. Indians and Asians have been brainwashed into believing that eating white, processed rice is a sign of prosperity. The same thing happened with North Americans and white bread in the 60s. So I dont think our ancestors had the same diet at all. Your right about activity though. Most evidence suggests that sitting is itself the problem. Has anyone noticed that rock band members seem to be staying healthy and living really long. Maybe its survivorship bias, or maybe bouncing around a stage frenetically, and standing keeps the body healthy.

Just curious, why do you want to avoid gluten? It's not bad for you unless you have Celiac disease. It's important to note that Coca Cola and other sodas sold in the U.S. don't contain the table sugar we're all familiar with. It contains high fructose corn syrup, which is far worse for you. If you want to drink healthier Coke, then buy the Mexican bottled one, which contains real sugar. Sugar and carbs are of course an important part of a healthy diet so it's not necessary to cut down too much. Btw I'm a vegetarian too. There is not much evidence that table sugar is any better than corn syrup based sugar. Table sugar is part fructose/part glucose. The data around this whole issue is pretty sketchy, like most dietary research. The problem is more to do with the pervasiveness of sugar(s) in processed foods these days. The total amount of glucose/fructose consumed has skyrocketed from any earlier times.

Actually, why are u surprised? Can you name one or two sectors that M&A heats up when the sector fundamental is as crappy as oil now? That seems to be the way. You need high prices to get the CEO juices running, especially when they want to buy with their own stock. Most board members here grasp the concept of capital allocation in terms of getting more than what you pay for. Most CEOs dont grasp this so well. They spend their entire careers getting to the top based on metrics that are completely the opposite of value investing. But we already know this, right. I worked a couple of years at Ge, watched them sink 100 million into a plant upgrade, then close the plant a couple of years later. Jack was still the CEO. If GE under Jack could make such obnoxious blunders then what of the average CEO.

rb, To clarify, When you buy call options or put options on an underlying security it is treated as capital gains or loss, as the case may be, not income. Line 127 of T1 See bolded line above We are talking past one another. What I am clarifying is that when an investor buys uncovered calls or puts they are treated the same as any common stock. The gains or losses are classified as capital transactions, not income as per Line 127 of form T1. In addition selling puts or calls, uncovered, can be treated, by an individual, as capital gains (losses) as long as you are consistent from transaction to transaction and year to year. Often times consistency in reporting is the key. An example of this is converting foreign exchange. You can elect to do it transaction by transaction, if your truly masochistic, or you can use the yearly average. So long as you are consistent and not trying to game the system either option is acceptable.

rb, To clarify, When you buy call options or put options on an underlying security it is treated as capital gains or loss, as the case may be, not income. Line 127 of T1

This discussion is ludicrous. You dont get where Buffett has got without being ruthless (in business). He has certainly made hundreds of high powered enemies along the way. Many of them would like to expose all his wrong doings if they could find them. The fact there are so few reports of wrong doings or fraud tells me he runs a tight ship. Is he the nice grandfatherly type. I doubt it. Does he exhibit symptoms of mild autism and insane focus on business and an obsession with making money - absolutely. Does that make him evil or corrupt? Not likely. Where there is smoke there is fire. Where there is no smoke there is probably no fire.