Let's Talk Money

Things that don't belong anywhere else. (Check first).

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 5504
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby ucim » Sat Mar 18, 2017 3:41 am UTC

sardia wrote:I guess I should be more clear. I already own a home. This is in regards to owning a second home. A less common scenario. The biggest commonality is the irrational exuberance​ in the belief that home values will never fall.
Oh, ok. Then it's just business outlook, tax incentives, dollars and cents, and whether or not you want the job of managing residential real estate. It's essentially a small business more than it is an investment.

I have no particular insight as to whether or not it's a good business to be in at this time, or how easy it is to get in and out of. As to the mantra your parents chant: remember the Alamo various real estate collapses; both national and local. That said, if it's a business you like, you can probably do well, because you will become familiar with its peculiar ins and outs. If it's not, you could get e't'.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
Isaac Hill
Systems Analyst????
Posts: 499
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 9:35 pm UTC
Location: Middletown, RI

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby Isaac Hill » Sat Mar 18, 2017 5:50 pm UTC

sardia wrote:I guess I should be more clear. I already own a home. This is in regards to owning a second home. A less common scenario. The biggest commonality is the irrational exuberance​ in the belief that home values will never fall.
Do you mean a second home as in a summer or weekend place you would reside in part time and would otherwise be empty, or a place you would rent out to others?

If it's a place to rent out, a house might not be a good idea, because the fate of your investment is tied to a single tenant. If that tenant doesn't pay rent, or damages the place, you lose money. Eviction can be a lengthy and expensive legal process. Then, your asset sits empty while you repair damages. This happened to the previous owners of my house. They had to put quite a bit of money into it before it was in sellable condition.

You could diversify a little bit by buying a multi-family building. If one tenant is terrible, you at least have others keeping you afloat while you deal with them. My coworker owns a 6-family building. He rents out 5 units and the building manager (his sister) lives in the 6th as part of her salary. When someone moves out, he's still got 4 people paying rent while he finds a new tenant.
Alleged "poems"
that don't follow a rhyme scheme
are not poetry

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5771
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby sardia » Mon Apr 10, 2017 11:08 pm UTC

What's cheaper, paying for an electric toothbrush, and going to the dentist less often (say 1/year or every other year) or just using a cheap 2$ manual toothbrush, and going twice a year like the dentist says? This study says you reduce incidence of plaque (7%) and gingivitis (17%). That doesn't seem like it would warrant a ROI to go electric. Maybe for kids?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15190692

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 5504
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby ucim » Tue Apr 11, 2017 12:07 am UTC

Key standout:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15190692 wrote:RESULTS:

...however only the rotating oscillating toothbrush consistently provided a statistically significant though modest benefit over manual toothbrushes in reducing plaque (7%) and gingivitis (17%)....

CONCLUSION:

...only one type of electric toothbrush, the rotating oscillating toothbrush consistently demonstrated a statistically significant benefit over manual toothbrushes, and the majority of studies did not meet the standards for inclusion...
I refer you now to this comic.

Personally I am not convinced that there is anything there. Yeah, 17% is interesting, but I suspect that brushing technique varies that much. I would not use the study as way to attempt to save money one way or another.

I am reminded of my ground school instructor's comments on picking a flight instructor: "Are you going to look for a bargain in a brain surgeon?"

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5771
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby sardia » Tue Apr 11, 2017 2:34 am UTC

ucim wrote:Key standout:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15190692 wrote:RESULTS:
...however only the rotating oscillating toothbrush consistently provided a statistically significant though modest benefit over manual toothbrushes in reducing plaque (7%) and gingivitis (17%)....
CONCLUSION:
...only one type of electric toothbrush, the rotating oscillating toothbrush consistently demonstrated a statistically significant benefit over manual toothbrushes, and the majority of studies did not meet the standards for inclusion...
I refer you now to this comic.
Personally I am not convinced that there is anything there. Yeah, 17% is interesting, but I suspect that brushing technique varies that much. I would not use the study as way to attempt to save money one way or another.
I am reminded of my ground school instructor's comments on picking a flight instructor: "Are you going to look for a bargain in a brain surgeon?"
Jose

I always found that saying only as useful as the person saying it. Would I take healthcare advice from my flight instructor or how to land in a crosswind?
That point aside, it's probably not a big difference but I'm curious what "modest difference" means in terms of outcomes. Frankly the only outcomes with teeth is either gingivitis, bad breath, or a cavity (or progression from there but at that point, we get into if you couldn't afford a dentist, how did you pay for that electric brush?) Does that mean you get 1 less cavity or deep expensive cleaning over x years? Too bad the data isn't as clearly stated.
Last edited by sardia on Tue Apr 11, 2017 1:42 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby ahammel » Tue Apr 11, 2017 2:39 am UTC

Dunno about the rest of you, but I'd lay out a fair amount of cash for even a marginally better chance of avoiding cavity drilling. Certainly I'm willing fork over the cost of a new electric toothbrush every few years.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 7466
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby Zohar » Tue Apr 11, 2017 12:33 pm UTC

ahammel wrote:Dunno about the rest of you, but I'd lay out a fair amount of cash for even a marginally better chance of avoiding cavity drilling. Certainly I'm willing fork over the cost of a new electric toothbrush every few years.

Agreed. Also my experience with dentists in the US has been not great. Would like to avoid. Am using an electric toothbrush.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5771
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby sardia » Tue Apr 11, 2017 1:46 pm UTC

ahammel wrote:Dunno about the rest of you, but I'd lay out a fair amount of cash for even a marginally better chance of avoiding cavity drilling. Certainly I'm willing fork over the cost of a new electric toothbrush every few years.

As opposed to brushing technically correct twice a day, eating less sugar/ acidic(but really fast so exposure times are short)? You could also check for dry mouth, and inhale one or two really big meals instead of 3 leisurely meals and snacks/dessert.
I have an electric toothbrush too, but there are other options that are just as effective if a bit esoteric.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5489
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue Apr 11, 2017 2:42 pm UTC

ahammel wrote:Dunno about the rest of you, but I'd lay out a fair amount of cash for even a marginally better chance of avoiding cavity drilling. Certainly I'm willing fork over the cost of a new electric toothbrush every few years.


Electric Toothbrushes are like... $15 now. I guess you need 2xAA rechargeable batteries with those so maybe we can increase the total cost of ownership by $10 for a 4x pack of AA batteries. (2-AA to leave in the toothbrush, 2-AA batteries to keep charged up and ready).
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby ahammel » Tue Apr 11, 2017 2:53 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
ahammel wrote:Dunno about the rest of you, but I'd lay out a fair amount of cash for even a marginally better chance of avoiding cavity drilling. Certainly I'm willing fork over the cost of a new electric toothbrush every few years.

As opposed to brushing technically correct twice a day, eating less sugar/ acidic(but really fast so exposure times are short)? You could also check for dry mouth, and inhale one or two really big meals instead of 3 leisurely meals and snacks/dessert.
I have an electric toothbrush too, but there are other options that are just as effective if a bit esoteric.

Or I could do all of those things, I guess. But using an electric toothbrush is a lot less disruptive to my life then completely overhauling my eating habits would be.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5771
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby sardia » Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:52 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
ahammel wrote:Dunno about the rest of you, but I'd lay out a fair amount of cash for even a marginally better chance of avoiding cavity drilling. Certainly I'm willing fork over the cost of a new electric toothbrush every few years.


Electric Toothbrushes are like... $15 now. I guess you need 2xAA rechargeable batteries with those so maybe we can increase the total cost of ownership by $10 for a 4x pack of AA batteries. (2-AA to leave in the toothbrush, 2-AA batteries to keep charged up and ready).

Electric toothbrush are only better if they rotate and you use a brushing motion as well.

Ahammel, half of my advice isn't so much massive Life style changes as simply being healthier. Dry mouth is a side effect of medication, but all the rest isn't so horrible. Don't eat dessert, don't snack, don't eat unhealthy sugary foods. Is that so radical? Eating less acidic foods is a bit rough, but not horrible. The other half is being born/raised lucky.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5489
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue Apr 11, 2017 5:02 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:
ahammel wrote:Dunno about the rest of you, but I'd lay out a fair amount of cash for even a marginally better chance of avoiding cavity drilling. Certainly I'm willing fork over the cost of a new electric toothbrush every few years.


Electric Toothbrushes are like... $15 now. I guess you need 2xAA rechargeable batteries with those so maybe we can increase the total cost of ownership by $10 for a 4x pack of AA batteries. (2-AA to leave in the toothbrush, 2-AA batteries to keep charged up and ready).

Electric toothbrush are only better if they rotate and you use a brushing motion as well.


Hmm, from what I've heard, Electric Toothbrushes are better if they get above 10,000+ pulses per minute (150+ pulses per second). At that speed, the vibrations actually start to get further into the gumline than what manual brushing can get. The Toothbrush I posted is 15,000 pulses per minute, while other electrics can get to 20,000 or higher.

There are rotating heads that I've seen, but they are much slower. Barely faster than manual actually... so I don't expect it to be any better (especially since manual toothbrushes have advanced bristle designs that try to get in between the gums now)

In any case, none of it is as deep cleaning as flossing. Soooo... you need to floss anyway.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby ahammel » Tue Apr 11, 2017 5:09 pm UTC

sardia wrote:Ahammel, half of my advice isn't so much massive Life style changes as simply being healthier. Dry mouth is a side effect of medication, but all the rest isn't so horrible. Don't eat dessert, don't snack, don't eat unhealthy sugary foods. Is that so radical? Eating less acidic foods is a bit rough, but not horrible. The other half is being born/raised lucky.
They're not so bad (except for switching from 3 to 2 meals: that would be a big change for me). But they're still more disruptive than changing toothbrushes.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5771
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby sardia » Tue Apr 11, 2017 7:13 pm UTC

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/03/heal ... ities.html
Need to floss? Doubtful. Should you? Yea, it's low risk and low cost for the benefit. Iirc the issue is that nobody flosses with the right technique. Similar to how nobody brushes correctly.

User avatar
ameretrifle
Vera
Posts: 812
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 6:32 am UTC
Location: Canada (the flat bit)

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby ameretrifle » Tue Apr 11, 2017 9:46 pm UTC

sardia wrote:Ahammel, half of my advice isn't so much massive Life style changes as simply being healthier. Dry mouth is a side effect of medication, but all the rest isn't so horrible. Don't eat dessert, don't snack, don't eat unhealthy sugary foods. Is that so radical? Eating less acidic foods is a bit rough, but not horrible. The other half is being born/raised lucky.

Unless you have diabetes, in which case eating fewer meals is more likely to cause blood sugar fuckery, or acid reflux, in which case big and/or rare meals can increase pressure on your stomach valves, increasing the likelihood of things opening and leaking when they shouldn't. And "inhaling" meals is such a hilariously bad idea for anyone with stomach or weight issues, oh my god. So you might want to slap a YMMV on fewer meals/not snacking definitely being The Healthy Thing to do.

Food/health/lifestyle science in general is soooooo far from being settled science that it isn't even funny. Flip-flops every couple goddamn years. There just needs to be a huge mental YMMV on every bit of health advice, because there are always exceptions, always. And healthier for one part of your body may not be healthier for other parts; everyone is different, and you've got to judge the tradeoffs for yourself. Is it worth eating fewer meals to maybe increase tooth health at the expense of stomach and/or mental health? Depends how your tooth health is, how much you prioritize it, how your stomach health is and how much you prioritize it (if it would jeopardize that, which for some people it would and others it wouldn't), how much (if at all) it would disrupt your life and how much you care... so yeah, for different people the answer to your rhetorical question could be anything from "no, not so radical at all" to "acid reflux and vomiting are also pretty shitty for your dental health, actually, so I think I'll give that a miss".

Different strokes, for different folks! And so on and so on and scooby dooby doo...

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5771
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby sardia » Tue Apr 11, 2017 10:46 pm UTC

ameretrifle wrote:
sardia wrote:Ahammel, half of my advice isn't so much massive Life style changes as simply being healthier. Dry mouth is a side effect of medication, but all the rest isn't so horrible. Don't eat dessert, don't snack, don't eat unhealthy sugary foods. Is that so radical? Eating less acidic foods is a bit rough, but not horrible. The other half is being born/raised lucky.

Unless you have diabetes, in which case eating fewer meals is more likely to cause blood sugar fuckery, or acid reflux, in which case big and/or rare meals can increase pressure on your stomach valves, increasing the likelihood of things opening and leaking when they shouldn't. And "inhaling" meals is such a hilariously bad idea for anyone with stomach or weight issues, oh my god. So you might want to slap a YMMV on fewer meals/not snacking definitely being The Healthy Thing to do.

Food/health/lifestyle science in general is soooooo far from being settled science that it isn't even funny. Flip-flops every couple goddamn years. There just needs to be a huge mental YMMV on every bit of health advice, because there are always exceptions, always. And healthier for one part of your body may not be healthier for other parts; everyone is different, and you've got to judge the tradeoffs for yourself. Is it worth eating fewer meals to maybe increase tooth health at the expense of stomach and/or mental health? Depends how your tooth health is, how much you prioritize it, how your stomach health is and how much you prioritize it (if it would jeopardize that, which for some people it would and others it wouldn't), how much (if at all) it would disrupt your life and how much you care... so yeah, for different people the answer to your rhetorical question could be anything from "no, not so radical at all" to "acid reflux and vomiting are also pretty shitty for your dental health, actually, so I think I'll give that a miss".

Different strokes, for different folks! And so on and so on and scooby dooby doo...

To be fair, the core health advice of exercise, eat greens and not too much processed/sugary stuff hasn't changed in decades. Most of the controversy has been around cheats to get ahead, like high interval intensity training (get fit in 1/4 the time!) or eat chocolate, prevent cancer! The eating food quickly comment is based off a weird quirk of food and dental health. The bacterial acid attack on teeth doesn't depend on how much you eat, just how long the eating action lasts. Aka sipping a soda/sweet coffee all morning long instead of finishing it during a quick meal. Same applies for snacking or multimeals. It takes like 20-30 minutes for saliva to neutralize the acid, so constantly eating even small sips takes a bigger toll on your teeth.
You're also cheating if you start throwing unhealthy people into the mix.

User avatar
ameretrifle
Vera
Posts: 812
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 6:32 am UTC
Location: Canada (the flat bit)

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby ameretrifle » Thu Apr 13, 2017 7:59 am UTC

I dunno, there's been an awful lot of controversy about carbs, sugar, fat, and cholesterol in very recent memory, and those seem pretty "core" to me.

Yes, I was already aware of the effect of food on saliva production. However, if there is more to your body than your teeth, it may be worth taking more than your dental health into consideration when making decisions about your health. It is a widely accepted fact that the feeling of fullness takes about 15-20 minutes to get to your brain. Multiple studies have suggested that eating more quickly results in eating more (because you keep eating lots while that signal is still on its way) and feeling less full long-term. This might be a valid concern for people who are worried about gaining weight. I'm reasonably sure that, in western culture, many "healthy" people have this fear. Also, saliva, rather than being merely a vehicle for tooth cleansing, also plays a role in the digestion of food. Eating quickly leaves it less time to do its job, potentially overtaxing the rest of the digestive system. Additionally, you are more likely to swallow excess air while eating quickly, and to chew less, further straining the rest of your digestive system in its attempt to absorb nutrients from the food you eat. These factors can cause indigestion... even in "healthy" people. Google "eating quickly". You won't find anything positive. Most of it will be pop-science clickbait, of course, but there'll also be stuff like this. At any rate, when weighing your assertion against the advice of every doctor I've heard speak about the topic, I'm going to go with the latter when judging which habit is "healthy".

I would suggest that the cost, moral and financial, of purchasing an electric toothbrush, might not be dire enough to warrant such lifestyle changes, nor such a defense thereof. While lifestyle changes are certainly valuable options and deserve promotion, they are not inherently better or more virtuous than any other approach. Furthermore, neither do they preclude alternate approaches; it is entirely possible to both eat more healthily (though I still fervently dispute that eating quickly can accurately be described as "healthy" in any definition of the term that extends beyond one's molars) and to buy an electric toothbrush. Perhaps you fear that buying an electric toothbrush will induce complacency, a tendency to eat in a slatternly way in faith that the toothbrush will make up for it. I would suggest that this fear is misplaced, and ultimately irrelevant. Furthermore, if eating quickly does tend to lead to eating more, it might not even lead to any cost savings in the long run, which is, I believe, the ostensible purpose of this discussion. It might be, in short, a false economy. Regardless, it is, at the very least, incredibly off-topic.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25740
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Apr 18, 2017 1:47 pm UTC

sardia wrote:if you couldn't afford a dentist, how did you pay for that electric brush?
A dentist visit for cleaning costs around as much (without insurance) as an expensive electric toothbrush. If the brush allows you to skip one dentist visit over the course of its lifetime, you break even. If it allows you to skip more (or keeps you on the healthy side of the cavity threshold) or you went with a cheaper brush, you save money.

Also, yeah, the advice to inhale meals is, frankly, ridiculous as soon as you consider literally anything beyond the health of your teeth.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5771
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby sardia » Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:33 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
sardia wrote:if you couldn't afford a dentist, how did you pay for that electric brush?
A dentist visit for cleaning costs around as much (without insurance) as an expensive electric toothbrush. If the brush allows you to skip one dentist visit over the course of its lifetime, you break even. If it allows you to skip more (or keeps you on the healthy side of the cavity threshold) or you went with a cheaper brush, you save money.

Also, yeah, the advice to inhale meals is, frankly, ridiculous as soon as you consider literally anything beyond the health of your teeth.

None of the studies quantify the benefit in terms of reduced visits or cavities.

Have you noticed the sensitivity to excessive pressure while brushing? It causes gum recession and enamel abrasion, but I'm not sure how delicate teeth are to electric toothbrushes.

In my defense, evidence shows that drinking or snacking all morning is worse for your teeth then finishing your snack right away.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 7466
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby Zohar » Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:54 pm UTC

sardia wrote:In my defense, evidence shows that drinking or snacking all morning is worse for your teeth then finishing your snack right away.

There's a difference between spreading your meal over four hours, 20 minutes, or 3 minutes. By which I mean, no one is advocating for the extreme you're talking about.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25740
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Apr 18, 2017 4:46 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:
sardia wrote:if you couldn't afford a dentist, how did you pay for that electric brush?
A dentist visit for cleaning costs around as much (without insurance) as an expensive electric toothbrush. If the brush allows you to skip one dentist visit over the course of its lifetime, you break even. If it allows you to skip more (or keeps you on the healthy side of the cavity threshold) or you went with a cheaper brush, you save money.

Also, yeah, the advice to inhale meals is, frankly, ridiculous as soon as you consider literally anything beyond the health of your teeth.

None of the studies quantify the benefit in terms of reduced visits or cavities.
I know, hence the "if"s.

In my defense, evidence shows that drinking or snacking all morning is worse for your teeth then finishing your snack right away.
How is that in your defense? No one's saying snacking all morning is good for your teeth or for any other aspect of your health. My point was that regardless of what's good for your teeth, we are more than our teeth.

But also, again, "inhaling" your meals is not the only alternative to "snacking all morning", nor is it even really an alternative at all, given how different the involved quantities of food likely are.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 25601
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby SecondTalon » Tue Apr 18, 2017 8:44 pm UTC

God, Gmal. It's like you don't fucking know the literal only options are to take sixteen continuous nonstop hours per meal or to eat the whole thing in under five minutes.

Get it together! Do some research!



Seriously, snacking all morning? What the actual fuck kind of bullshit is that?
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

Nork
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 4:05 pm UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby Nork » Tue Apr 18, 2017 8:55 pm UTC

SecondTalon wrote:only options are to take sixteen continuous nonstop hours per meal or to eat the whole thing in under five minutes.

I see you've met my daughter...

User avatar
ameretrifle
Vera
Posts: 812
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 6:32 am UTC
Location: Canada (the flat bit)

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby ameretrifle » Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:03 am UTC

sardia wrote:In my defense, evidence shows that drinking or snacking all morning is worse for your teeth then finishing your snack right away.

Yes, and if I surgically removed your lung and connected it to a nice artificial blood supply and clean airflow and whatnot in a sterile environment, I'm sure it would be a lot healthier than it would be if it were still in your body breathing in all the nonsense and pollution of the outside world and being exposed to any toxins or plaque or whatnot that I'm sure at least occasionally show up in your bloodstream. And yet, somehow I doubt you would quantify the surgical removal of your lung as the "healthy" option for you. Even if it were better for your lung.

No one has disputed for a moment that eating quickly is theoretically better for your teeth. I and IIRC everyone else have explicitly acknowledged that that is correct. The point is that it is a very bad idea for your health in every other way.

Ugh, to hell with this widening gyre. Let's actually talk money. I have one retirement account from a part-time job with like $150 in it, and another with more like $1500. They're the type that's invested in various stocks or bonds, there are various options to pick higher or lower risk plans. I'd like to consolidate it or something to simplify my financial life, but there can be weird financial penalties for that, and also I'm no longer in the US. Which also probably means I should transfer the bulk of my US account into CDs or something. Which would be a hassle, but I'm still unemployed, so no better time to start. (I left it liquid initially on the off chance I needed to bail back to the states, but that ain't happening for about 12 different reasons, so it's probably time I did something else...) All the options just seem obscure and labyrinthine to me, and the whole being another country over isn't helping. I should muster the will to go on and do it, though. Whatever the fuck "it" actually is.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5771
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby sardia » Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:02 am UTC

ameretrifle wrote:Ugh, to hell with this widening gyre. Let's actually talk money. I have one retirement account from a part-time job with like $150 in it, and another with more like $1500. They're the type that's invested in various stocks or bonds, there are various options to pick higher or lower risk plans. I'd like to consolidate it or something to simplify my financial life, but there can be weird financial penalties for that, and also I'm no longer in the US. Which also probably means I should transfer the bulk of my US account into CDs or something. Which would be a hassle, but I'm still unemployed, so no better time to start. (I left it liquid initially on the off chance I needed to bail back to the states, but that ain't happening for about 12 different reasons, so it's probably time I did something else...) All the options just seem obscure and labyrinthine to me, and the whole being another country over isn't helping. I should muster the will to go on and do it, though. Whatever the fuck "it" actually is.

The term/form you're looking for is the rollover for a 401k.
http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/inv ... er_options
This link covers your basic options. The standard advice is to not take the cash distribution unless you're in dire straits. IIRC, it's all one form, and you just pick what you want to do. Combining the retirement account money is the obvious solution, but it still leaves you with a single account without a lot of money into it. Your #1 savings goal is to not get nickel and dimed by fees. Generic easy advice: spend all your retirement money on cheap mutual funds that follow the SP 500. Once you save up more money, then you can start diversifying into fancier options, like lower expense ratios, tax free bonds and inflation protection. But for you, your priority is to save something(anything) per year into a fund that grows without monitoring, and has low fees.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 7466
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby Zohar » Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:45 pm UTC

We all know the ancient Europeans knew best, and so if you have to eat you really only have two options - Roman day-long gala or two Spartan boys fighting to the death over who gets the last scrap of food.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 5504
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby ucim » Wed Apr 19, 2017 1:08 pm UTC

Yeah, when you've got a thousand mile long screwdriver, it's hard to accomplish anything. (And it takes a long time to sober up. :) )

You can do a direct transfer of funds from one IRA to another. It's a bit more complicated with (some) other plans because there are different rules depending on where the money came from, but an email to your financial institution should elicit the easiest way to combine these two. You may have to pay fees to close the account. (Sometimes you don't have to pay a fee to empty it, and then you can leave the empty one to close itself for free - depends who you have it with). However, if the two accounts are fee-free to maintain, and you're not doing anything with the money anyway, it might not be worth the hassle. You don't really have to do anything with an IRA, like report it on your taxes or anything. So yeah, it's "cleaner" if there's only one account, but there's no real impact if there are no maintenance fees.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
doogly
Dr. The Juggernaut of Touching Himself
Posts: 5191
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:31 am UTC
Location: Somerville, MA
Contact:

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby doogly » Wed Apr 19, 2017 1:28 pm UTC

And you probably need to verify whether you're talking about an IRA, a 401(k), or whichever else, because the basic principle is the same ("Don't bother keeping a second account for a small amount of money, move it to the other one") but the implementation will depend on account type. Probably.
LE4dGOLEM: What's a Doug?
Noc: A larval Doogly. They grow the tail and stinger upon reaching adulthood.

Keep waggling your butt brows Brothers.
Or; Is that your eye butthairs?

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 5504
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby ucim » Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:25 pm UTC

doogly wrote: ("Don't bother keeping a second account for a small amount of money, move it to the other one")
Well, sometimes it's worth doing so (such as when one account gives you a bennie the other doesn't - such as live quote access or somesuch). And sometimes, once done, it's too much trouble to move the money to another account, so let sleeping dogs lie. But yeah, generally fewer accounts are easier to handle, especially when they are tiny.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5771
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby sardia » Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:39 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
doogly wrote: ("Don't bother keeping a second account for a small amount of money, move it to the other one")
Well, sometimes it's worth doing so (such as when one account gives you a bennie the other doesn't - such as live quote access or somesuch). And sometimes, once done, it's too much trouble to move the money to another account, so let sleeping dogs lie. But yeah, generally fewer accounts are easier to handle, especially when they are tiny.

Jose

There's another hidden concern here, which is why the money saved is so low. If he was just spending it all, no big deal, just save more. But if he's in tight financial situation, then his priority should be up save up an emergency cushion. Saving up for a 401k or IRA is pointless if you have to pay early withdrawal fees.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 5504
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby ucim » Wed Apr 19, 2017 5:28 pm UTC

sardia wrote:There's another hidden concern here, which is why the money saved is so low.
Maybe xe's just starting out. The $150 was from a part-time job (and is probably in a separate account because that's what they offered). You are addressing financial discipline, which while important, may either be irrelevant or inapplicable to the situation. Xe didn't volunteer, and as this is a public board, one must be careful. Xe might want to run for President, and wouldn't want to disclose their finances to avoid the appearance of integrity. :)

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
ameretrifle
Vera
Posts: 812
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 6:32 am UTC
Location: Canada (the flat bit)

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby ameretrifle » Thu Apr 20, 2017 1:47 am UTC

Regrettably, my accounts appear to be 401a "FICA Alternative Plans". I am not entirely certain what this is, though it appears to be billed as an alternative to paying Social Security fees, which does not fill me with hope. These were both jobs with the state of Florida, which is currently pretty Republican. Prides itself on lowest state worker per capita. Trying desperately, like too many government agencies and companies, to steer employees away from actual pension plans by any means necessary. (Let's default you to the other plan unless you object within 6 weeks! Because you want freedom!) And not exactly paying a ton to begin with. Capped out ~30K. After a couple promotions. And was only there for 2 years.

Anyway, I should probably move my American money from generic savings into some sort of investment format that's worth a damn (and obviously should have before, but, better late). In theory I guess I could add to one of the 401as, but I somehow doubt that's the best option. (They have like a couple dozen different stock/bond funds you can choose from at any time, "long-term to "inflation-protected" to "multisector" etc etc. I'm sure which of those you pick has an impact on how effective it is as an investment, but I have doubts about this 401a concept to begin with, so I don't know.)

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 5504
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby ucim » Thu Apr 20, 2017 2:29 am UTC

http://finance.zacks.com/fica-alternate-retirement-plan-11386.html wrote: How to Tap It

Employees can withdraw money from a FICA alternative plan after leaving a job. Withdrawals are subject to federal income taxes. Distributions can also be made starting at age 59 1/2, or if a worker becomes disabled. The IRS may charge a 10 percent penalty for withdrawals made before 59 1/2. Employees must begin required minimum distributions at 70 1/2. Money in a FICA alternative retirement plan can be rolled over into other retirement accounts such as a traditional IRA.
If you have an IRA, rolling into that may make some sense. But before doing anything, figure out a broader scale investment/retirement savings plan, and then build in that direction. No sense moving things around just for the lulz.

Again, check for fees.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5771
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby sardia » Thu Apr 20, 2017 3:09 am UTC

In a more general sense, be sure to build a financial cushion of some sort to prevent yourself from accessing retirement money. It's typically 3-6 months of living expenses, but 1000 eurodollars is usually enough to pay for most emergencies (car/furnace/arm breaks.)
Depending on your choice of mutual funds for your 401a, put it into the single cheapest(look for low expense ratio) S&P 500 fund until you have at least 10,000. Diversifying is pointless if it costs you extra in fees. For example, my 401k offers me the SP500 mutual fund at the cost of 0.20 expense ratio. Expense ratio of 1% will cost you 1 dollar for every $100 you have a year. So mine costs me 20 cents a year per $100. The very best funds charge .08 dollars (8cents) per $100 dollars, but require a lot of money to be invested.

the apprentice
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 8:26 pm UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby the apprentice » Sat May 06, 2017 12:20 pm UTC

I like to buy raw materials as cheap as possible and make things as high quality as possible to save money, like my own bee breeding equipment, my own shoes and a greenhouse, the savings have been very high indeed.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5771
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby sardia » Sat May 06, 2017 1:54 pm UTC

the apprentice wrote:I like to buy raw materials as cheap as possible and make things as high quality as possible to save money, like my own bee breeding equipment, my own shoes and a greenhouse, the savings have been very high indeed.

Good old fashion sweat equity. It's a shame that not everyone does it, I know I certainly am limited in my ability to fix/create things myself.

the apprentice
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 8:26 pm UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby the apprentice » Sat May 06, 2017 4:51 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
the apprentice wrote:I like to buy raw materials as cheap as possible and make things as high quality as possible to save money, like my own bee breeding equipment, my own shoes and a greenhouse, the savings have been very high indeed.


Good old fashion sweat equity. It's a shame that not everyone does it, I know I certainly am limited in my ability to fix/create things myself.


Thanks.

I truly believe it's everyones duty at some time in their lives to at least have a go at doing something for their self pelf no matter how small it may be, where the old add age says, genius is 90 percent perspiration and 10 percent inspiration.
I have trained many international students in my time and know many are sleeping geniuses just waiting to be given the knowledge and stability to begin walking their own walk.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7289
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby Zamfir » Mon May 08, 2017 10:47 am UTC

sardia wrote:
the apprentice wrote:I like to buy raw materials as cheap as possible and make things as high quality as possible to save money, like my own bee breeding equipment, my own shoes and a greenhouse, the savings have been very high indeed.

Good old fashion sweat equity. It's a shame that not everyone does it, I know I certainly am limited in my ability to fix/create things myself.

At a guess, it's the other way round- peopel do too much do-it-yourself work. DIY is heavily favoured by the tax structure. People can save money on DIY jobs, even when the pros would be better and faster at those jobs. Those tax "savings" are not material savings, it's just shifting the tax burden to non-DIYers.

If everyone did that, there would be no savings for anyone - just people staying at home from a job they're good at, to do work that others would be better at.

Of course, productivity is not the only reason to do things. If you like some DIY work (perhaps only as a change from other work), that's great, and the savings are a bonus. But it's a shame when people do DIY work that they do not enjoy, for savings that are mostly tax artifacts.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5771
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby sardia » Mon May 08, 2017 1:26 pm UTC

After reflection, I agree. There's the counter intuitiveness in that making money or saving it is more tangible than saving time (which could be used to make more money). Some things are so obviously more efficient that it's never worth doing yourself, like sealing certain driveways​. But the idea of fixing something now seems foreign to me when it's something I can do. Especially when the things I can do are pretty limited. I'd probably change my mind if I could create or fix anything.

You didn't discuss the cases where you have time to spare but no money. Can you think of reasons why you would spend money instead of sweat equity there?

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 7466
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Let's Talk Money

Postby Zohar » Mon May 08, 2017 1:29 pm UTC

sardia wrote:You didn't discuss the cases where you have time to spare but no money. Can you think of reasons why you would spend money instead of sweat equity there?

How often does this happen? Poor people quite often have to work quite a lot to stretch their money.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: measure and 18 guests