Re: How much $ is needed to never have to work again?
 

[ QUOTE ]
You can keep harping on this like a nit if you want, but the OP's stated goal will be met by 12% return on my initial stake of 200k, so when I said I'm confident of making 12 to 15 percent, taxes are insignificant and irrelevant to the question at hand.

If it makes you any happier, my T-bonds in the backup 300k stake, that I also mentioned in my first post, will be pulling down 5%.

[/ QUOTE ]You are confident in making 12% on the total $500,000 or just the $200,000?

very rough estimates:
$300,000 @ 5% + $200,000 @ 12% gives you $500,000 @ 7.8%
(3/5)*.05+(2/5)*.12, x=.078

$300,000 @ 5% + $200,000 @ 22.5% gives you $500,000 @ 12%
(3/5)*.05+(2/5)*x=.12, x=.225

So, I doubt you realistically think you are confident in achieving 22.5% per year on the %200,000. You must mean 12% per year with $200,000 [which is still a stretch].

If someone is not satisfied with the simple calculations, I will figure this out for compounding interest. Just give me how many times the interest compounds per year (1,2,3,4,...,n,...,infinity).

Re: How much $ is needed to never have to work again?
 

[censored],

I think his point was the 12% on the 200K covered the 2K/month bogie. While the 5% on 300K covered, any taxes and appreciation.

The only question I have is, how much effort would be expected to achieve "consistant" 12-15% returns?

(and does that time exceed the OPs parameters)

Re: How much $ is needed to never have to work again?
 

To get $5000/mo inflation-adjusted out of a lifetime insurance annuity requires giving 'em $1.65M upfront at about age 40. Non-inflation adjusted they'll give ya $5000/mo for $975K. To get $3K/mo to meet OP's request for $2K/mo plus a little growth, adjusted for inflation, would need $1M. More if you're younger. Less if you're an old fart.

http://www.aigretirementgold.com/vli...=RequestaQuote

Re: How much $ is needed to never have to work again?
 

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Fundy/TA?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, both.

[ QUOTE ]
long term/short term?

[/ QUOTE ]

Short term. I hate being in anything over a month. Turnover, baby. Get the product in the door and out. That's what got Walmart where it is today.


[/ QUOTE ]

This are kind of contradictory, aren't they? Fundamentals don't have much to do with price action over a single month. Or are you doing some sort of arbitrage?

Re: How much $ is needed to never have to work again?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The only question I have is, how much effort would be expected to achieve "consistant" 12-15% returns?

(and does that time exceed the OPs parameters)

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it does. My brain conveniently ignored that part, partly because I enjoy watching the market, and would do it to some degree even if I could make no money from it. I don't see it as "work" but very few others would have the same outlook.

Re: How much $ is needed to never have to work again?
 

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Fundy/TA?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, both.

[ QUOTE ]
long term/short term?

[/ QUOTE ]

Short term. I hate being in anything over a month. Turnover, baby. Get the product in the door and out. That's what got Walmart where it is today.


[/ QUOTE ]

This are kind of contradictory, aren't they? Fundamentals don't have much to do with price action over a single month.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure they do. Earnings announcements, contract announcements, major alliances, all that sort of thing moves stock, sometimes for several days.

Re: How much $ is needed to never have to work again?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The only question I have is, how much effort would be expected to achieve "consistant" 12-15% returns?



[/ QUOTE ]

I think achieving consistent 12-15% returns has more to do with the market than the investor. If the market is rising at 12-15% per year then the effort required involves buying & holding an index fund.

If the market is flat or declining, it ivolves significant effort or is too difficult (nearly impossible?) to do consistently

[ QUOTE ]

Yes it does. My brain conveniently ignored that part, partly because I enjoy watching the market, and would do it to some degree even if I could make no money from it. I don't see it as "work" but very few others would have the same outlook.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that's how the poker grinders start off thinking until they realise it's only fun while you're winning. Playing the market for fun is more for a retiree with a stable income. That's where a lot of pro's trading profits come from.

Re: How much $ is needed to never have to work again?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think achieving consistent 12-15% returns has more to do with the market than the investor. If the market is rising at 12-15% per year then the effort required involves buying & holding an index fund.

If the market is flat or declining, it ivolves significant effort or is too difficult (nearly impossible?) to do consistently

[/ QUOTE ]

Not even close to being impossible. But then I've posted that about a thousand times.

[ QUOTE ]
I think that's how the poker grinders start off thinking until they realise it's only fun while you're winning. Playing the market for fun is more for a retiree with a stable income. That's where a lot of pro's trading profits come from.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been watching and trading the markets since the 70's. I know by now if it's fun or not.

Re: How much $ is needed to never have to work again?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think achieving consistent 12-15% returns has more to do with the market than the investor. If the market is rising at 12-15% per year then the effort required involves buying & holding an index fund.

If the market is flat or declining, it ivolves significant effort or is too difficult (nearly impossible?) to do consistently

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are not putting any time into the market, then surely you are at the mercy of the market.

However, if you are putting time into understanding the market, then if you can identify the character of the market, taking advantage of a flat or declining market is only a matter of adapting to the situation, not impossible.

Similar to adapting to changing table dynamics on a poker table.