[patientrenter]

[quote=ice9]…I’m 40 yrs old and keep thinking about stopping work and living off investments…. dividend paying stocks that average 5.5%, and only withdrawal the dividend income…. that income combined with dividend income from my other investments would allow me to stop working.

Any fatal flaws to this thinking?[/quote]

Fatal flaws? Yep. Where do I start?

-A sustainable, inflation-protected, diversified dividend yield of 5.5% isn’t a reasonable assumption

-Retiring at 40 when you don’t have enough saved is a very high risk move, and it is unnecessary. Surely your job isn’t that bad.

That’s enough. They’re pretty basic problems.

[patientrenter]

[quote=ice9]…I’m 40 yrs old and keep thinking about stopping work and living off investments…. dividend paying stocks that average 5.5%, and only withdrawal the dividend income…. that income combined with dividend income from my other investments would allow me to stop working.

Any fatal flaws to this thinking?[/quote]

Fatal flaws? Yep. Where do I start?

-A sustainable, inflation-protected, diversified dividend yield of 5.5% isn’t a reasonable assumption

-Retiring at 40 when you don’t have enough saved is a very high risk move, and it is unnecessary. Surely your job isn’t that bad.

That’s enough. They’re pretty basic problems.

[patientrenter]

[quote=ice9]…I’m 40 yrs old and keep thinking about stopping work and living off investments…. dividend paying stocks that average 5.5%, and only withdrawal the dividend income…. that income combined with dividend income from my other investments would allow me to stop working.

Any fatal flaws to this thinking?[/quote]

Fatal flaws? Yep. Where do I start?

-A sustainable, inflation-protected, diversified dividend yield of 5.5% isn’t a reasonable assumption

-Retiring at 40 when you don’t have enough saved is a very high risk move, and it is unnecessary. Surely your job isn’t that bad.

That’s enough. They’re pretty basic problems.

[patientrenter]

[quote=ice9]…I’m 40 yrs old and keep thinking about stopping work and living off investments…. dividend paying stocks that average 5.5%, and only withdrawal the dividend income…. that income combined with dividend income from my other investments would allow me to stop working.

Any fatal flaws to this thinking?[/quote]

Fatal flaws? Yep. Where do I start?

-A sustainable, inflation-protected, diversified dividend yield of 5.5% isn’t a reasonable assumption

-Retiring at 40 when you don’t have enough saved is a very high risk move, and it is unnecessary. Surely your job isn’t that bad.

That’s enough. They’re pretty basic problems.

[patientrenter]

“Let’s go a step further and provide relief to those who need relief the most ”

Yep, I vote for relief for people who need it the most – the renters. We should look up the highest amount of ‘relief’ provided to a single homeowner by this ass-backwards proposal, and then match that amount for every renter out there.

Who should pay for this new renters’ subsidy? Well, I vote for homeowners. Create a new tax on them, to subsidize renters.

All this is totally nonsensical. Many of our economic problems arose from spending too much on housing, with too much financing, at prices that were too high. This proposal simply funnels yet more subsidies to people who engaged in all these behaviors. Whatever you tax, you get less of, and whatever you subsidize, you get more of.

[patientrenter]

“Let’s go a step further and provide relief to those who need relief the most ”

Yep, I vote for relief for people who need it the most – the renters. We should look up the highest amount of ‘relief’ provided to a single homeowner by this ass-backwards proposal, and then match that amount for every renter out there.

Who should pay for this new renters’ subsidy? Well, I vote for homeowners. Create a new tax on them, to subsidize renters.

All this is totally nonsensical. Many of our economic problems arose from spending too much on housing, with too much financing, at prices that were too high. This proposal simply funnels yet more subsidies to people who engaged in all these behaviors. Whatever you tax, you get less of, and whatever you subsidize, you get more of.

[patientrenter]

“Let’s go a step further and provide relief to those who need relief the most ”

Yep, I vote for relief for people who need it the most – the renters. We should look up the highest amount of ‘relief’ provided to a single homeowner by this ass-backwards proposal, and then match that amount for every renter out there.

Who should pay for this new renters’ subsidy? Well, I vote for homeowners. Create a new tax on them, to subsidize renters.

All this is totally nonsensical. Many of our economic problems arose from spending too much on housing, with too much financing, at prices that were too high. This proposal simply funnels yet more subsidies to people who engaged in all these behaviors. Whatever you tax, you get less of, and whatever you subsidize, you get more of.

[patientrenter]

“Let’s go a step further and provide relief to those who need relief the most ”

Yep, I vote for relief for people who need it the most – the renters. We should look up the highest amount of ‘relief’ provided to a single homeowner by this ass-backwards proposal, and then match that amount for every renter out there.

Who should pay for this new renters’ subsidy? Well, I vote for homeowners. Create a new tax on them, to subsidize renters.

All this is totally nonsensical. Many of our economic problems arose from spending too much on housing, with too much financing, at prices that were too high. This proposal simply funnels yet more subsidies to people who engaged in all these behaviors. Whatever you tax, you get less of, and whatever you subsidize, you get more of.

[patientrenter]

“Let’s go a step further and provide relief to those who need relief the most ”

Yep, I vote for relief for people who need it the most – the renters. We should look up the highest amount of ‘relief’ provided to a single homeowner by this ass-backwards proposal, and then match that amount for every renter out there.

Who should pay for this new renters’ subsidy? Well, I vote for homeowners. Create a new tax on them, to subsidize renters.

All this is totally nonsensical. Many of our economic problems arose from spending too much on housing, with too much financing, at prices that were too high. This proposal simply funnels yet more subsidies to people who engaged in all these behaviors. Whatever you tax, you get less of, and whatever you subsidize, you get more of.

[patientrenter]

RP is not the most popular politician out there, nor are his positions universally acceptable. Yet he is very popular, and many do agree with some of his positions. Having said all that, what he advocates would badly dent the pockets of the (bipartisan) community that runs Wall Street and Washington DC. The media – and other Congressmen – don’t bite the hand that feeds them.

[patientrenter]

RP is not the most popular politician out there, nor are his positions universally acceptable. Yet he is very popular, and many do agree with some of his positions. Having said all that, what he advocates would badly dent the pockets of the (bipartisan) community that runs Wall Street and Washington DC. The media – and other Congressmen – don’t bite the hand that feeds them.

[patientrenter]

RP is not the most popular politician out there, nor are his positions universally acceptable. Yet he is very popular, and many do agree with some of his positions. Having said all that, what he advocates would badly dent the pockets of the (bipartisan) community that runs Wall Street and Washington DC. The media – and other Congressmen – don’t bite the hand that feeds them.

[patientrenter]

RP is not the most popular politician out there, nor are his positions universally acceptable. Yet he is very popular, and many do agree with some of his positions. Having said all that, what he advocates would badly dent the pockets of the (bipartisan) community that runs Wall Street and Washington DC. The media – and other Congressmen – don’t bite the hand that feeds them.

[patientrenter]

RP is not the most popular politician out there, nor are his positions universally acceptable. Yet he is very popular, and many do agree with some of his positions. Having said all that, what he advocates would badly dent the pockets of the (bipartisan) community that runs Wall Street and Washington DC. The media – and other Congressmen – don’t bite the hand that feeds them.

[patientrenter]

[quote=waiting hawk]”NEW YORK/SHANGHAI (Reuters) – China bluntly criticized the United States on Saturday one day after the superpower’s credit rating was downgraded, saying the “good old days” of borrowing were over.”

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/China-flays-US-over-credit-rb-3974888722.html?x=0%5B/quote%5D

That’s just noise for domestic Chinese consumption. China continues to export far more than it imports. As long as it does that, it must buy vast amounts of US assets. When China’s trade with the US becomes balanced, you know they are serious about the US being too risky to invest in.

[Author]

Posts