Trey3216

I can't get the Field of Dreams monologue out of my head...and I've come to a conclusion about it. It is the finest, most endearing artistic representation of sport ever caught on film. I fully believe that it should be played in every ballpark, before every game, about 15-20 minutes before first pitch...when people are starting to file into their seats with fresh popcorn, hot dogs, a full beer, a souvenir helmet full of ice cream for the kiddos. That monologue is as much a part of the sport as the sport itself. It should be forever celebrated and displayed as it is the bucket of memories that have been made, that are being made, and that will be made long down the road by going to a ballgame...or wearing a glove...and saying, "Hey Dad...you wanna have a catch?"

FIFY

He seems very...grounded

Went about 2 weeks ago on a thursday at 12:30 and there were about 20 total in there. Food was on point...crowd was not. But then I drive by Helberg about 3x/week and there's always folks running through their temp drive through service. Unless you have an old bombed out building that is barely up to health code, Brick & Mortar is a tough bet in the BBQ game.

Show me a loss!

I've had a drunken Treaty of Roppolo a time or two.

Not impugned by any stretch. And not trying to create mental gymnastics. It's not my primary business tool, it's a tool in a bag to add to the other tools for a balanced long term strategy. -Dramatically cheaper term- Absolutely... It's great to have in the bag, it's not great when it runs out and your forget to buy additional or can no longer be underwritten for coverage due to a medical issue and you still need coverage. -Retirement accounts will certainly have better long term returns...they will also incur compound taxes (those not in ROTH) at unknown future rates and there's always the chance that you don't get there. Having a backup plan for your family if you don't make it there is part of a plan Like I said, I'm not saying it's for everyone. I'm not saying it's the only thing or the best thing. It's damn sure not the most complicated thing. It's the original form of life insurance at the most basic level. Having some of it in your bag of tools is not going to make or break you, and at the end of the day you're going to end up in just about the same spot you would to begin with. And yes, there are a bunch of charlatans in the industry, just like there are a bunch of charlatans in any industry. But everyone on here talking about running all their Monte Carlo simulations and hypothetical return scenarios are doing the same thing. You just gotta hope you pic the right scenarios. I'm not in the hope business. I'm in the strategy business.

I wasn't comparing it to an equity investment in any way. And the only ones I work with are properly funded from a mutual company using accelerated paid up additions. My entire point, in terms of your example, is that it is often good to have both a hammer and a saw in a tool bag rather than just a set of different sized hammers or different functioning saws.

It really comes down to whether or not someone is willing to commit to getting about 95% of their maximum financial potential with close to 100% certainty or if you're willing to risk 25%+ of that certainty in order to get that extra 5% of your pile. Some folks are good either way. Like I said, it's a strategy...a long game...but it's not zero sum.

I'll have my 3 and 2 year old with me. So while there'll be beers a plenty, and plenty cold, I'll probably keep it pretty light. And since I'll have them with me, I'd venture to guess I don't even shoot a full box over 3 hunts. So long as they have fun and we have a good visit with the 50-75 family members that will be out there....that's all that matters.

You're talkin' about boobs, right?

Headed out to Haskell County to drink birds and shoot beer, errrr, drink shoots and bird beer.... Saturday night low of 56 is gonna be absolutely glorious.

Sorry, I had a huge reply to this yesterday typed out and ready to send and the damn computer froze and closed down my internet wormhole. Alas, I'll try to respond exactly as I started yesterday... -To answer the bold portion, I'm saying you should utilize cash from a whole life policy en lieu of withdrawing from the qualified plan in a down market year (specifically, a down market year early in retirement) The idea being, if you have 3 years worth of cash piled in that policy to create 3 buffer years, the odds tilt greatly into your favor for never running out of money. Not to mention the fact that you're not going to pay ordinary income tax on that transaction. -Low withdrawal rates do help handle downturns...depending upon the sequence of returns, which is a risk in and of itself. -And yes, you could functionally increase your withdrawal rate, giving you a higher income in retirement based on a paydown schedule rather than an interest only/low rate withdrawal schedule. Reason being....Your life insurance is basically Asset Replacement Insurance at that juncture. You know you're going to die at some point. It's a mathematical fact. Why not take more retirement income and when you die, your Death Benefit of a permanent life policy will replenish the assets you spent for your spouse, or your heirs? -The premium situation, as you view it, is the biggest hallmark of information vacuum. You need to look at what year the cash value of the policy begins to grow more than the annual premium. For someone age 45 or so, it's usually year 6-8. After that, the amount of premium you contribute annually vs annual cash value growth is decreasing in perpetuity. Meaning, you've functionally paid the entirety of the insurance cost load in those first years. Now, compare that to continually buying new term policies for the same benefit over the next 3 decades, or 4 decades, and the total premiums on the term insurance are not going to be that much cheaper than the combined premium for those first 6-8 years of the whole life policy....and you have no cash to show for it. THe opportunity cost of term insurance is all the lost dollars you would have gained by putting that cash to work elsewhere. -your AFLAC example is off. For one, a whole life policy is likely going to increase in benefit. I ran one on a Male, 30 year old, standard non-tobacco. I did $6000 annual premium to make it $500/mo to see. You get an initial DB of $485-500k. By age 65, it's a DB of $885k with almost $500k of cash value. At 75 it's a DB over $1mm with $685k in cash value. So yeah, it's not as great as the $1mm by 65 putting it in the market...but it's not supposed to be. It's also not going to get taxed like the stuff in the market, management fees like the stuff in the market, subject to ordinary income tax on distribution like the market stuff if it is in a traditional IRA or 401k, and not subject to the whims of market risk like the market asset is. -All this to say, I'm not advocating anyone to only do one or do the other. I'm advocating for people to do a little bit of both. Why? Because utilizing Whole Life as part of a strategy works. It's not the only strategy. But neither is only having money in the market. I didn't even mention using it as another way to put cash to work for kid's education above what you can contribute to the more commonly used methods. What happens when you're contributing to those things and you die? You don't contribute anymore. I also didn't mention the fact that if you develop a chronic or terminal disease (think dementia or cancer), you can access the death benefit in a whole life policy while you're still alive to help pay for the costs of those situations rather than eating into your family's nest egg.

No doubt. And that' not what I'm saying. But the mechanics of it in the accumulation phase and the distribution phase are quite different.

It makes sense in this scenario as well: Say you have x dollars already in qualified money. You continue to contribute to that money right up to retirement age with those dollars wholly invested in S&P 500. You build a pretty large nest egg. The math right now says that a 2.8% withdrawal rate is the recommended rate to not run out of money. You've saved all your life so you can be afforded the opportunity to withdraw ~3% of it per year without fear of running out. If you have a permanent life policy in place, you can afford to spend your money you saved. Use the life policy to replenish your funds for your legacy. In the meantime, you have the cash value you can draw on in down market years (buffer cash) which allows the qualified $$ to replenish itself by not double dipping. The math works fine. You just have to be willing to look at it. The last 15-20 years of piling money into qualified plans don't really add that much to your pile at the end of the day. THere's not enough time on your exponential curve for that money to multiply. That's the math that people tend to overlook.

I "borrowed" some potassium from the chemistry lab and flushed it down the toilet in HS. Didn't mean to bust that pipe, Sir.

Didn't you read!! THey were tied with a top 10 team halfway through the first quarter!!!

That'll make a fine patina. Perfect for vintage re-sale market!

I mean, if I suddenly came into FU money and I wanted to buy my parents $600k house from them for $1.2mm and then let them live in the guest house for free, that's my decision and there's nothing nefarious about it.

What kind of evil spirit we dealing with here? Vampire?

It’s a top 10 personal movie for me…not because it’s one of the 10 best ever made, but because it’s one of the one of the coolest movies ever made, with a legit adapted true story behind it, and has one of the very best soundtracks in the history of film. So rewatchable, and transcends time

OJ's son made ribbons out of her