You have been disciplined to continue investing. You're one of the few.
Now, here's what we don't know: What kind of account are you investing in equities with? Is it a retirement account or just an individual/joint brokerage account?
How much have you paid each year in capital gain taxes? Capital gain distributions? Dividends?
I assume you've paid your taxes and that you paid those out of a different pocket or account than the account you have your equities in.
To keep it as a fair comparison, this information may be useful.
So then why does it seem you are looking for reassurance from anybody here?
Do you need somebody's blessing? an OKY DOKY?
I understand what I have done for myself short, mid and long term. I need no one's approval for my methods as they work for me.
They don't have to work for you, you have to find something that works for you. If you have and feel comfortable with those choices, there is absolutely no need for the reaction and comments you've made here. The way you've written your posts here betray your confidence in your own decisions.
As I wrote I use my WL as "what if I F up" protection against my other more agressive risk investments.
I also apply my "what if I F up" to my decision to purchase WL over term? Did I make the right decision? let's see at age 50..
I am no longer insurable for health reasons, yet pay a prefered best premium for my WL policies I purchased as a young fit man. I don't have to worry about being priced out of my insurance policy or stuck paying policy maximums for a term policy.
I can premium offset my policies and never put another dime in them.
My policies will be inforce as long as I am around. While I may not make 75 or 80 years, it would suck if I did and my policies didn't.
I have been able to tap the cash values several times in order to pay the IRS( for a really good year) and some other things here and there. Some thru dividend surrenders and policy loans. I was able to do this without asking permission of anybody else and without surrender or transaction fees.
After 20 years if I had invested the difference (ballparked on American Century Calc.) in a "similar risk" (AAA bonds) investment I'd have about 80k compared to the 65k I have in those WL policies. Before taxes about a $750 a year difference. Throw taxes in and it washes to about $500 a year difference or $45 a month.
That's what my choice costs me looking back. I can live with that.
Looking forward, I know my insurance costs are fixed, I don't have the term surprize to look forward to. I can live with the minor difference between choices in my past to know I won't have to turn around and use my gains to pay the new term costs.
I know I want insurance until the day I die. Not everbody does. I do. To each their own.
You have been disciplined to continue investing. You're one of the few.
Now, here's what we don't know: What kind of account are you investing in equities with? Is it a retirement account or just an individual/joint brokerage account?
How much have you paid each year in capital gain taxes? Capital gain distributions? Dividends?
I assume you've paid your taxes and that you paid those out of a different pocket or account than the account you have your equities in.
To keep it as a fair comparison, this information may be useful.
Its not tax deferred. it's my own trading account with sharebuilder.
Do you think that the taxes have been $30K????? hmmm that would mean that i was in a 100% tax bracket.
Even if i was in pitbulls fantasy 40% tax rate, the taxes would only be about $12k.
I didn't say that. All I said was that we needed to get a more accurate picture. Statement balances don't show the taxation - unless you paid the taxes OUT of that account.
That's all.
Now, have you calculated the amount of income that you expect to generate out of this fund that you're putting money into?
I didn't say that. All I said was that we needed to get a more accurate picture. Statement balances don't show the taxation - unless you paid the taxes OUT of that account.
That's all.
Now, have you calculated the amount of income that you expect to generate out of this fund that you're putting money into?
We paid the taxes from the funds in the account. we figured that was the best way to go. i don't stay invested in equities all the time so when i sell stuff and have the money in mostly cash, i'll send some of the cash to the irs as part of our quarterly income tax payments.
I don't understand your question about the amount of income that i expect to generate from the fund. why is that relavant.
its not tax deferred. it's my own trading account with sharebuilder.
Do you think that the taxes have been $30K????? hmmm that would mean that i was in a 100% tax bracket.
Even if i was in pitbulls fantasy 40% tax rate, the taxes would only be about $12k.
ACTUALLY, I know it's HARD for you to fathom a 40% tax bracket, BUT it HAS BEEN and WILL BE (2011) a REALITY for MANY AMERICANS!!! It is QUITE OBVIOUS that you are in a LOW tax bracket that won't be affected if you are ONLY placing a MEASLEY 3K annually into investments . Dave Ramsey's a millionaire; he should pay his call center PEONS more than that wouldn't you say? Bottom feeders like yourself DON'T have to worry too much about taxes and that's is why your opinions and views on the subject are so NARROW.
President Obama's proposed income-tax increases on higher-income taxpayers would be effective in 2011.
The president has proposed raising the top two tax brackets. The 35% top rate on ordinary income would increase to 39.6%, and the 33% rate would rise to 36%. The president also has proposed new limits on itemized deductions, and the top rate on long-term capital gains and most dividends would rise to 20% from 15%. The president says these plans would affect upper-income Americans, described as families making more than $250,000.
Last edited by TEXAS PITBULL : 09-16-2009 at 03:51 PM.
Reason: adding to topic
It's part of the long-term planning that I do with clients.
There are 3 major financial phases: accumulation (which is what we're talking about now), distribution and preservation.
Most people see these as three separate phases, when they are part of one lifetime strategy.
When you're accumulating in a vehicle, I want to calculate how it will affect your future income in retirement - positively or negatively.
You see, you're still hung up on the idea that it is "he with the most money by retirement... wins" when it really is "those with the most spendable assets... wins".
This is where a properly defined LIFETIME strategies reviewed annually help people make good decisions.
This was why I asked you how much income you anticipate this S&P fund to provide for you - to see if you've projected your assumptions through retirement.
It's part of the long-term planning that I do with clients.
There are 3 major financial phases: accumulation (which is what we're talking about now), distribution and preservation.
Most people see these as three separate phases, when they are part of one lifetime strategy.
When you're accumulating in a vehicle, I want to calculate how it will affect your future income in retirement - positively or negatively.
You see, you're still hung up on the idea that it is "he with the most money by retirement... wins" when it really is "those with the most spendable assets... wins".
This is where a properly defined LIFETIME strategies reviewed annually help people make good decisions.
This was why I asked you how much income you anticipate this S&P fund to provide for you - to see if you've projected your assumptions through retirement.
Wow. that's amazing.
Did you come up with this idea all by yourself?
Just curious, but will the wl policy that has grown in cash value by 2/10ths of 1 percent over the past 10 years somehow generate more income in my retiremenet for me and my hubbie than significantly higher amoutns in cash and equities?
At the pace we're going, in just 10 years, we'll have about 4x as much as the cash value of the wl pol.
Is there some way that the wl will suddenly make up what it has not gained in cash value by having a large increase in "income"?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Originally Posted by TEXAS PITBULL
ACTUALLY, I know it's HARD for you to fathom a 40% tax bracket, BUT it HAS BEEN and WILL BE (2011) a REALITY for MANY AMERICANS!!! It is QUITE OBVIOUS that you are in a LOW tax bracket that won't be affected if you are ONLY placing a MEASLEY 3K annually into investments . Dave Ramsey's a millionaire; he should pay his call center PEONS more than that wouldn't you say? Bottom feeders like yourself DON'T have to worry too much about taxes and that's is why your opinions and views on the subject are so NARROW.
President Obama's proposed income-tax increases on higher-income taxpayers would be effective in 2011.
The president has proposed raising the top two tax brackets. The 35% top rate on ordinary income would increase to 39.6%, and the 33% rate would rise to 36%. The president also has proposed new limits on itemized deductions, and the top rate on long-term capital gains and most dividends would rise to 20% from 15%. The president says these plans would affect upper-income Americans, described as families making more than $250,000.
All i ask pitbullsht is that you don't show someone a 40% tax bracket unless they really have taxable income of over $357k per year. each spuose could be makign 200k per year but after deductions, they might only have taxable income of $300k.
To show a higher taxbracket to someone than what they really have now implies that you need to "fudge the numbers" in order to sell a policy.
Last edited by GonnaFlyNow : 09-16-2009 at 04:30 PM.
Reason: Posts merged
wow. that's amazing. did you come up with this idea all by yourself?
Just curious, but will the wl policy that has grown in cash value by 2/10ths of 1 percent over the past 10 years somehow generate more income in my retiremenet for me and my hubbie than significantly higher amoutns in cash and equities?
At the pace we're going, in just 10 years, we'll have about 4x as much as the cash value of the wl pol.
is there some way that the wl will suddenly make up what it has not gained in cash value by having a large increase in "income"?
Here we are actually trying to be civil with you, and all you can do is continue to be an a-hole. But to answer your question: Yes. By having a WL policy on the shelf in retirement, one can potentially enjoy more income through the leverage of the permanent death benefit. The CSV and dividends are a bonus.
This is because more income options are available in retirement. Pension max, CRTs, reverse mortgages, tax-free policy loans and dividends, and asset spend-downs all become viable options in retirement. You don't get these options the way you're set up currently. You're forced to make choices: income for yourself, or take less so you can pass along more to your heirs. Admittedly, it isn't an easy concept for most folks, and you being particularly close-minded and dense makes explaining this that much more difficult. But if you understand how pension max, CRTs and the like work, you'll understand having a permanent death benefit makes these strategies work that much better.
It's not about how much wealth you can create, it's about how much income you can generate. If you would like to understand how this works, speak with a true LEAP professional. I can refer you to someone. Otherwise, I suggest you pipe down. You're in waaaaaay over your head.
By the way, on foxnews.com, I stumbled across this ad. I thought it was a nice depiction of how a WL policy can truly help during tough times:
wow. that's amazing.
Did you come up with this idea all by yourself?
Just curious, but will the wl policy that has grown in cash value by 2/10ths of 1 percent over the past 10 years somehow generate more income in my retiremenet for me and my hubbie than significantly higher amoutns in cash and equities?
At the pace we're going, in just 10 years, we'll have about 4x as much as the cash value of the wl pol.
Is there some way that the wl will suddenly make up what it has not gained in cash value by having a large increase in "income"?
Exactly as Death Cab said - it's about the death benefit guarantees.
You keep comparing products. I keep telling you that it ISN'T ABOUT PRODUCT. It's about STRATEGY. It's about the organization, integration and coordination of all your assets.
I'm sorry that you simply can't understand this and that you keep comparing products &/or investments.
If I can show you how to spend your death benefit while you're still alive... what would THAT rate of return be? (Hint: you ignore the cash values and you simply add up your premium costs and determine what % that is of the permanent death benefit. It's probably around 12-15% on a guaranteed basis - ASSUMING that you know how to spend your death benefit while you're still alive.)
Alright folks lets calm down. I will break in and break it down into simple tones, simple language. my grandfather bought me a whole life policy when i was born & I bought the same policy for my children and grandchildren, its called a custom whole life with a mutual company which means it pays dividends building up the face amount over time & the cash values, waiver of premium and it paid up when i turned 30. my grandfather paid $35 a month for this policy for 30 years until it popped.
It also has whats called a slirp concept, slirp meaning supplemental life insurance retirement plan. what does that mean? well in my policy it states that when i reach 62 in a few years it will pay me $2500 each month tax free for the next 25 years, think about this, tax free $2500 a month, if lets say you worked all of your life and you invested up to $600,000 with a cd rate of 5% that is about $2500 a month(truth is the dow lost about 50% but lets just say that these past 30 years you had positive returns and it builit up to $600,000) into a roth ira-but you paid taxes on an investment that tremendously lost buckets of money due to the down turn but to stay positive i will say you didnt loose any money and you accumulated $600,000 on it, the entire time paying taxes on it time.
Now lets compare it too this whole life policy, no money was taxed but as a matter of fact that money that would have been taxed was actually placed into an ira, fixed income annuity, and again at 62 I'll begin recieving a gauranteed monthly check of about $3000 a month from the annuity. Now all of this is gauranteed money. Also i opted out of the company 401k and was one of the few that kept the traditional pension plan, boy was i lucky on that one, im so glad i did again another $3000 a month pension adding to the already $5500($2500 from slirp on whole life & $3000 guaranteed income for life annuity) brings me a total of $8500 a month no economic downturn touched it-it was grandpa's advise(he called it estate planning which was creating a class of wealth untouched by the perils( you should know what a peril is insurance agents) the perils of an economic downturn or more commonly known as a recession but...
Me being a hard head listened to the likes of my cpa and the suzy advise, which was buy term and I invested into a roth Ira as well, paying taxes on an investment that tremendously lost money and listening to my old cpa, she told me buy term and invest the difference and now my attorney is pressing heat down her throat because her financial advise is having her to now use her liability insurance, be very careful advising some of your wealthier clients because when you make a boo boo, you will pay for it. I look back now, and i am thankful that i have the guarantees of whole life, annuity, pension but i realized that term is only temporary use for things like credit cards, car notes, a mortgage which is folks who are paying to own a home, forgive me I'm not familair with mortgages. But i had insurance on the job which is known as working term life insurance & a separate term policy in case i passed which would be invested at 5% to create a trust fund for my children & surviving spouse-again the concept of estate planning. Theres common insurance agents that just sell a product-but if you have time i want you to visit with someone who represents a company that my family has dealt with for generations, as a matter of fact the company has been in business since 1845, it survived the civil war, 2 world wars, the great depression and even this simple downturn and when you visit this person tell em TJ sent you-make sure they write that down & also have them tell you about the SLIRP concept, annuitys & estate planning. I checked my grandchildrens policys and the name of the company is called, New York Life.
I think this debate has been quite interesting; let's take me for example. I am in an accumulation phase; My 401K which I have funded rather faithfully had grown to around 50K. until last years. Now it has 26K in it.
To make up for it I am putting 19% of my income combined between 401K and stock options I can buy in the company. And the stock options are taxable at capital gains, long term, or current taxable rate at short term.
I am thinking at this point (I'm 39). I should have purchased a UL or VUL or WL and would have been better off! The 401K has not reduced my taxes THAT much by what I have lost.
And my refundable mortgage/term policy for 200K runs out...yep at around 62...
Here we are actually trying to be civil with you, and all you can do is continue to be an a-hole. But to answer your question: Yes. By having a WL policy on the shelf in retirement, one can potentially enjoy more income through the leverage of the permanent death benefit. The CSV and dividends are a bonus.
This is because more income options are available in retirement. Pension max, CRTs, reverse mortgages, tax-free policy loans and dividends, and asset spend-downs all become viable options in retirement. You don't get these options the way you're set up currently. You're forced to make choices: income for yourself, or take less so you can pass along more to your heirs. Admittedly, it isn't an easy concept for most folks, and you being particularly close-minded and dense makes explaining this that much more difficult. But if you understand how pension max, CRTs and the like work, you'll understand having a permanent death benefit makes these strategies work that much better.
It's not about how much wealth you can create, it's about how much income you can generate. If you would like to understand how this works, speak with a true LEAP professional. I can refer you to someone. Otherwise, I suggest you pipe down. You're in waaaaaay over your head.
By the way, on foxnews.com, I stumbled across this ad. I thought it was a nice depiction of how a WL policy can truly help during tough times:
Maybe I misinterpreted the video. Explain to me how having $1mm in the company's WL policies 'sad'. Oh, that's right. It could have been in CDs. Or a money market. Or invested in stocks for a higher return! Wow, absolutely brilliant!
What's sad is you have no idea and you continue to live in willful ignorance.
a million bucks in cash value in the wl policies.
How sad.
I would love to have that. I am paying no taxes on any dividends and I have tax free access to my money. If I die no probate for my beneficiary/beneficiaries. Sure is a sad situation.
Re: Suze Orman
. Dave Ramsey's a millionaire; he should pay his call center PEONS more than that wouldn't you say? Bottom feeders like yourself DON'T have to worry too much about taxes and that's is why your opinions and views on the subject are so NARROW.
Linear Mode
