Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-15-2014, 04:38 PM
 
25 posts, read 70,104 times
Reputation: 51

Advertisements

Please purchase 50k bitcoins...so the price will go back up, thanks!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-15-2014, 05:35 PM
 
7,732 posts, read 12,638,064 times
Reputation: 12423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amisi View Post
I'm talking over $5million. You don't want "financial advisors" sticking their noses and hands into your money since you already know what you're going to do with it. Big problem is, FDIC only covers $250K. TOTAL... so even if you have 10 accounts at one bank with $250K in each one, you'll only be covered for $250K in the event something happens. So, what do you do? Do you spread this money out over several banks?
This is why poor people who win the lottery go broke. They always think they know how to manage millions of dollars (even though they never have) and make enemies in their minds of the very people whose jobs it is to help you manage and make even more money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2014, 05:57 PM
 
1,096 posts, read 1,049,132 times
Reputation: 1745
Quote:
Originally Posted by RecentGrad1 View Post
You do NOT want to put the majority of your money in a bank. You will be losing money every year due to inflation.

This is technically correct. But a very bad idea due to inflation, as stated above.
True... but even if you had 1% interest on $5 million you would make $50,000/year. Which isn't bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2014, 06:16 PM
 
Location: San Jose
574 posts, read 697,739 times
Reputation: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApePeeD View Post
True... but even if you had 1% interest on $5 million you would make $50,000/year. Which isn't bad.
It is bad when you made $50K at 1% interest over the course of that year, but also lost $150K at 3% inflation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2014, 06:21 PM
 
26,194 posts, read 21,631,821 times
Reputation: 22772
Quote:
Originally Posted by RecentGrad1 View Post
It is bad when you made $50K at 1% interest over the course of that year, but also lost $150K at 3% inflation.


Well the net is 2% and is that better or worse over the course of a year than say a 30% loss? It's all about risk mitigation for some folks and they will take the erosion of purchasing power

Take you yourself and your very limited income need. If you ran into 5mm tomorrow there would be no need for you to invest in equities given your limited need. Of course you could invest in equities but it wouldn't be necessary
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2014, 06:38 PM
 
Location: San Jose
574 posts, read 697,739 times
Reputation: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowexpectations View Post
Well the net is 2% and is that better or worse over the course of a year than say a 30% loss? It's all about risk mitigation for some folks and they will take the erosion of purchasing power

Take you yourself and your very limited income need. If you ran into 5mm tomorrow there would be no need for you to invest in equities given your limited need. Of course you could invest in equities but it wouldn't be necessary
No I completely understand that there's incredibly risk-adverse people out there. I just don't see how it's logical. If the US economy collapses and never comes back, and the US dollar becomes worthless, $5M sitting in banks is not going to save you. And since that's most likely not going to happen, why not invest your money? I can understand a hyper-conservative 1% withdrawal rate with equity (or even just bond) exposure, but cash is just horrible.



And while I only need very little to live on, that doesn't mean I wouldn't give any of my extra income to charity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2014, 06:45 PM
 
26,194 posts, read 21,631,821 times
Reputation: 22772
Quote:
Originally Posted by RecentGrad1 View Post
No I completely understand that there's incredibly risk-adverse people out there. I just don't see how it's logical. If the US economy collapses and never comes back, and the US dollar becomes worthless, $5M sitting in banks is not going to save you. And since that's most likely not going to happen, why not invest your money? I can understand a hyper-conservative 1% withdrawal rate with equity (or even just bond) exposure, but cash is just horrible.



And while I only need very little to live on, that doesn't mean I wouldn't give any of my extra income to charity.
You don't need to post returns for me or explain anything. I fully understand the situation, the concepts and why it's possible for people to stay out of the market. It's complete logical that if my need is X and I have let's say 250 times that I will be okay not taking any market risk. It's completely logical and I'm not sure how you couldn't see that even if you don't agree with the strategy. 100% cash isn't horrible if it fully meets your needs, you can't comprehend it because there is no way 100% cash could meet your needs
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2014, 06:53 PM
 
Location: San Jose
574 posts, read 697,739 times
Reputation: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowexpectations View Post
It's completely logical and I'm not sure how you couldn't see that even if you don't agree with the strategy. 100% cash isn't horrible if it fully meets your needs, you can't comprehend it because there is no way 100% cash could meet your needs
Like I said, I completely comprehend the strategy. I just think it's stupidly risk-adverse. If someone is so risk-adverse that they will accept nothing other than saving in pure cash, they need help, of a different kind.

I would park $5M in gold & silver (which I do not consider investments) before cash.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2014, 06:57 PM
 
26,194 posts, read 21,631,821 times
Reputation: 22772
Quote:
Originally Posted by RecentGrad1 View Post
Like I said, I completely comprehend the strategy. I just think it's stupidly risk-adverse. If someone is so risk-adverse that they will accept nothing other than saving in pure cash, they need help, of a different kind.

I would park $5M in gold & silver (which I do not consider investments) before cash.


Parking 5mm in gold and silver is not a smart idea if that's all the funds you have.


Why on earth would you call a strategy stupid and suggest someone implementing said strategy needed some kind of help if met all their needs and objectives? Really mind boggling
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2014, 07:29 PM
 
Location: San Jose
574 posts, read 697,739 times
Reputation: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowexpectations View Post
Why on earth would you call a strategy stupid and suggest someone implementing said strategy needed some kind of help if met all their needs and objectives? Really mind boggling
I already was very clear: because there's absolutely no reason to be so conservative. It shows a fundamental lack of understanding about how the economy works.

Why would anyone want to live with subpar returns for zero additional benefit? If one needs 50K a year, it would be safer to buy stocks and bonds (specifically index funds) with the $5M and draw the 50K/year rather than putting it in the bank. If the entire stock and bond market become worthless, the US dollar most likely also be worthless, as the value of the dollar is directly based on the value of the US economy. Hence why I hypothetically suggested buying raw metals, as that's at least something of a hedge if the dollar somehow loses it's value (the greatest risk of an investment in pure cash, even if a very small risk). Buying foreign currencies would be a similar hedge, though if the US dollar collapses foreign currencies would also be at risk.

So yes, I would not advise an all-cash portfolio in any case. Even with all-cash the risk of losing your investment is not zero. There is risk of higher than expected inflation making your all-cash investment insufficient.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top