prev <-> next
[2021-06-16 20:26:30] - daniel: which? paul's goal or my spending? ~a
[2021-06-16 19:17:33] - Mine are all in that ballpark and I'm planning on retiring early. Though as stated spending will play a big part in that. -Daniel
[2021-06-16 18:28:06] - a: Yup, I have a few different estimates and they range from $2 million to $3 million. -Paul
[2021-06-16 18:13:39] - paul: also i found this . . . you wrote this in 2020: "maybe my estimates say I need $2 million and I aim for $2.5 or $3 million instead". ~a
[2021-06-16 16:05:09] - paul: my current, family, yearly, spending, without taxes, ranges between 125 and 135. 35 of that is my mortgage. 15 is home improvement and utilities. 15 is restaurants and entertainment. 10 of that is trips/travel. 55 is the rest. i do expect my spending in retirement to be higher (mostly due to health insurance, but also, there will be taxes). based on this 2.5m won't be enough for me, and i have zero kids. ~a
[2021-06-16 15:54:21] - mine won't. ~a
[2021-06-16 15:54:13] - Also pretty sure my mortgage won't be paid off pre retirement. -Daniel
[2021-06-16 15:52:46] - Paul: I would definitely label my retirement spending amount as guestimation. I can look at our current monthly spending and see which things will still directly translate (utilities / groceries/ newspaper) and which won't (daycare / babysitting) but it will definitely be refined over time and try to get better as we get closer to actually trying to retire. -Daniel
[2021-06-16 15:48:01] - also its why i say "without taxes". taxes will be very different in retirement. ~a
[2021-06-16 15:47:29] - paul: it's why i've been using the word "current". then you don't need to predict the future. ~a
[2021-06-16 15:46:45] - a: But, yeah, I'm having a hell of a time estimating what we might spend in retirement. So many variables between taxes, mortgage (paid off or no?), health care costs, travel (I assume more, but maybe cheaper per trip if we're not taking the kids along)... -Paul
[2021-06-16 15:44:55] - a: I'm guessing our restaurant / grocery bills are more than yours too. -Paul
[2021-06-16 15:44:12] - a: I can believe it. You seem to take more trips than I do. I also think you might be surprised by our spending. Swim classes are >$200 a month. TKD is >$200 a month. We just spent probably close to $200 on new baseball equipment... -Paul
[2021-06-16 15:36:36] - paul: ok further deets, i have zero kids, and my spending is probably higher than yours? or at least close? i'm actually not really sure why that is honestly, because i think our mortgages are similar too
maybe i need to find out why my spending is so high? ~a[2021-06-16 15:34:29] - a: https://foolwealth.com/ You could see if you can find it there. Pretty sure, based on the history of the Fool, they would be most interested in some sort of subscription relationship. -Paul
[2021-06-16 15:33:48] - a: Well, kids affect cost of living, especially if there's talk of retiring early. Point taken, though. -Paul
[2021-06-16 15:30:07] - paul: "might have switched to a AUM model" baaarf. ~a
[2021-06-16 15:12:53] - paul: my goal divided by my current yearly spending, WITHOUT TAXES, is ~29. my goal divided by my current yearly spending, with CURRENT taxes, is ~15. ~a
[2021-06-16 15:12:30] - paul: nah, kids don't matter (much). your mortgage matters. your HCOL vs LCOL matters. ~a
[2021-06-16 15:11:50] - a: "its like partial information" That's what a lot of people pointed out: it depends a lot on kids and whatnot. I guess that doesn't help much, though, since I have lots of kids so it means my expenses will likely be higher. -Paul
[2021-06-16 15:11:04] - a: "i wonder if its something you could pay them for now?" I had that exact same thought and went to check. I think at one point they offered it, but might have switched to a AUM model. -Paul
[2021-06-16 15:07:18] - paul: the goal is meaningless without also looking at yearly spending. its like partial information. maybe if they had posted their goal and their spending? and/or their goal divided by their spending? just the goal is completely worthless. ~a
[2021-06-16 15:06:14] - paul: that is a nice perk. i wonder if its something you could pay them for now? maybe not, it could be that's something that they just aren't interested in "selling". ~a
[2021-06-16 15:06:01] - Makes me really worried about my ~$2.5 million goal. -Paul
[2021-06-16 15:05:12] - There was a twitter thread where somebody asked how much money people expected to need to retire (assuming their mortgage was paid off). Based on who posted it, I assume most respondents are planning on retiring early. Still, I was surprised to see a bunch of people saying $5-10 million (and others saying those numbers seemed low). -Paul
[2021-06-16 14:59:20] - a: One of the nice perks working at the Fool was getting free access to the financial planners there. I would talk to them about once a month to get a check-up on how things were going. -Paul
[2021-06-15 22:00:04] - paul: yeah, so obviously i am my own financial planner too. but yeah, there's a shit of stuff i don't know about so i'd like to talk to an expert who can tell me which things i'm doing wrong and they'll have answers to stuff i can't easily figure out on my own. i hope to still retain 100% control, so like i wouldn't be handing them my money, and telling them to manage it, but yeah. ~a
[2021-06-15 21:07:30] - a: More seriously, I do sometimes wonder if I should talk to one because of all the stupid tax stuff, but then I get angry at taxes and lose focus. -Paul
[2021-06-15 21:06:52] - a: No financial planner. I am my own financial planner (said in Judge Dredd's "I am the law" voice). -Paul
[2021-06-15 21:06:31] - a: Well, 90% of my twitter feed is investing, but politics almost always finds a way to seep in (and twitter feels like it is 90% liberal, if not more). My Facebook is probably 70% family stuff and maybe 15% politics (again, often liberal). -Paul
[2021-06-15 20:43:22] - hey, cool, i'm in the picture at the top of this article ~a
[2021-06-15 19:38:27] - paul/mig: daniel mentioned he has a financial planner ( https://www.garrettplanningnetwork.com/ ) . . . do you guys have a financial planner? ~a
[2021-06-15 19:16:49] - i guess i consume different media than you do. 90% of my twitter feed is about family-friendly transportation facilities in arlington and fairfax county and the other 10% is about the stock market. i watch a lot of john oliver on hbo, and seth meyers on youtube, and they talk about the shit coming out of fox news on occasion. (back when i watched the daily show and the colbert report, they did the same thing). ~a
[2021-06-15 19:04:37] - Much less often do I see something similar with Ben Shapiro or Neil Cavuto or whoever. -Paul
[2021-06-15 19:04:02] - a: It's one of those things where it's almost impossible to navigate social media or mainstream news without running into some of that. Maybe a friend shared a Maddow Youtube clip or Rosie is trending on twitter or some editorial on CNN is talking about Whoopi's moment on the View... -Paul
[2021-06-15 19:02:12] - a: "that's weird you would mention rosie odonnell, rachel maddow, and joy behar in that case. do you consume a lot of their media??" Not directly, but I hear about their media a lot. Shows up on twitter plenty. There's also a surprising amount of mainstream news ink spilled about stuff discussed on those shows. -Paul
[2021-06-15 17:40:20] - paul: "I don't consume a lot of conservative media" hah, that's weird you would mention rosie odonnell, rachel maddow, and joy behar in that case. do you consume a lot of their media?? i watch a shit-ton of fox news every time i'm in a hotel (i don't have cable at home). audrey hates it so i try to do it when i'm alone.
~a[2021-06-15 17:31:05] - Nuance is hard. People like answers, nuance doesn't always give that. I realize that is somewhat the point, but the same way amazon ekes out all the efficiencies it can and websites wants clicks news wants viewers and if they have determined that nuance doesn't give viewers then I'm not sure there is a great answer. -Daniel
[2021-06-15 17:17:22] - paul: rove is on the air, yes. spencer is not, but gets his message out in other ways. we're looking for "allies", being dead or off the air: or even never on the air, is fine as long as they are allies right? ~a
[2021-06-15 17:16:34] - paul: ben shapiro has lost all of his nuance. i regret shepard smith because his transformation seems to have been going in the more nuanced direction. ~a
[2021-06-15 17:16:03] - a: And isn't Shepard Smith supposed to be one of the "good guys" who is relatively objective? -Paul
[2021-06-15 17:15:24] - a: But also, I don't know if I am familiar enough with their work to necessarily disparage them so. I don't consume a lot of conservative media, so I hear about how bad they are a lot, but I don't have first hand evidence. I've seen some stuff from Ben Shapiro indicating that he has at least a little bit of nuance to him. -Paul
[2021-06-15 17:14:26] - a: I recognize a lot of those names now that you mention them, but honestly would've had trouble coming up with them otherwise. Also, I didn't realize some of them were on the air (Spencer? Rove?). -Paul
[2021-06-15 17:12:35] - mig: Didn't realize Rosie was gone. Agreed that Joy or Whoopi would've been better comps. -Paul
[2021-06-15 16:36:15] - paul: laura ingraham, greg gutfeld, bill schulz, andy levy. sarah sanders and kayleigh mcenany have joined fox news. bill oreilly, shepard smith, megyn kelly, greta van susteren, and gretchen carlson if we're ok including people forced off. glenn beck is still on the radio. ~a
[2021-06-15 16:19:31] - paul: you couldn't think of the name tucker carlson or ben shapiro??? richard spencer, jeanine pirro, tomi lahren, neil cavuto, steve doocy, brian kilmeade, geraldo rivera, milo yiannopoulos, sean hannity is a good one. karl rove (he's part of the press now), mark levin (you won't recognize his face: he's in radio only). why are we filtering out people forced off the air or dead? rush limbaugh died recently. ~a
[2021-06-15 15:55:37] - paul: rosie isn't on the view anymore. I'd think more relevant would be joy behar or whoopi goldberg. - mig
[2021-06-15 15:41:04] - a: Also, I wanted to include more from the right, but honestly all the names I could think of are like dead or have been forced off the air.
-Paul[2021-06-15 15:39:39] - a: She's on The View, which talks politics a lot and I would imagine in some ways influences political opinions more than the average congressperson. Does it have to be somebody in politics, though? It can be anybody that votes, frankly. -Paul
[2021-06-15 15:20:08] - rosie odonnell? like, the actress? is she a serious name in politics? agreed on most of the rest (no idea who brian shelter is) . . . they are probably pretty serious apologists. ~a
[2021-06-15 15:19:16] - a: And, sure, I don't want to be mean about it, but I think plenty of people we both know are part of the problem too. -Paul
[2021-06-15 15:18:20] - a: Specifically? You want names? Okay, uh, Chris Cuomo. Brian Stelter. Don Lemon. Rachel Maddow. Rosie O'Donnell. Sean Hannity. -Paul
[2021-06-15 15:15:04] - Prediction: Immigration doesn't get any better during Biden's administration. Still a giant, inhumane mess, even if the Biden admin maybe is a little more tactful about it. -Paul
[2021-06-15 15:15:02] - paul: who specifically is doing this? ~a
[2021-06-15 15:14:23] - a: Instead, everybody seems focused on just making the other side pay or accumulating power for their own side. -Paul
[2021-06-15 15:14:07] - a: Yeah, I wasn't necessarily talking about anybody here in terms of not being allies. It's more the huge number of people who see everything in terms of tribe only so masses of immigrant kids being caged is only an issue when R's (or D's) do it. Makes it hard to get any progress made on the actual issues. -Paul
[2021-06-14 21:44:27] - mig: agreed. ~a
[2021-06-14 19:22:20] - pr that the current admin is stonewalling all attempts at transparency and oversight to these facilities were immigrants are held. - mig
[2021-06-14 19:20:32] - a: that family separation is over doesn't change that immigrants are still being held in pretty shitty conditions. - mig
[2021-06-14 18:20:58] - replied thanks! ~a
[2021-06-14 18:17:32] - a: sc2? -Daniel
[2021-06-14 18:16:24] - paul: we won't agree on bakers making wedding cakes, but even i admit there's plenty of grey area where we would be agreeing. we both generally like free speech, but most places we disagree on free speech has nothing to do with the amendment or law. i honestly don't know much about immigration reform, so i'll gladly take either side of that debate. i don't like court packing in general, but i also have issues with the current system. ~a
[2021-06-14 18:11:26] - paul: we aren't going to agree on everything, but i think you and i are allies. ~a
[2021-06-14 18:10:33] - It would really be nice to have some consistent allies when it comes to immigration and anti-interventionism and free speech and executive power and court packing and bakers making gay wedding cakes and everything else instead of having it all be 100% dependent on which party is in power. -Paul
[2021-06-14 18:08:57] - a: "Forever" is... I guess an answer. Seems like a pretty nice blank check for a Democratic president to never be able to be criticized.
I guess I'm sitting here thinking, "Yeah, Trump was terrible, can we move on now and talk about how to fix the massive humanitarian crisis happening now instead of talking about how bad the last President was?" -Paul[2021-06-14 18:07:37] - a: Ah, this seemed like a different topic? Are you trying to make the argument that Biden has had some sort of success in terms of the border? I think even the mainstream media seems to realize it's a big problem. -Paul
[2021-06-14 18:04:02] - paul: *def* a biased source, but family separation might have gone negative? ~a
[2021-06-14 18:02:40] - paul: i don't know. i'm guessing there's less family separation? literally "trump is worse but, again, you brought it up". ~a
[2021-06-14 18:02:10] - paul: forever? or at least until we get a worse president? for what its worth, you brought it up
literally "bad stuff Trump did" was you topic. also, regarding miguel's link, i don't think i was saying "trump was worse", some of my stuff was borderline "trump was worse", but most of it was actually more along the lines of "is family separation over? i'm not sure." ~a[2021-06-14 18:02:03] - a: And by the numbers, hasn't it been far worse under Biden so far? -Paul
[2021-06-14 18:01:49] - a: And then the other side gets into office, and all we hear is how the other side started it or the other side was so much worse. Sure, maybe Trump was more malicious, but ultimately does it matter? The end result is that a bunch of kids are being held in unsafe and unsanitary conditions by a government that either doesn't care or is too incompetent to deal with it. -Paul
[2021-06-14 17:58:33] - a: This is going to sound angrier than I intend, so please take this as at least 40% joking, but how long do Democrats get to use the excuse of "Trump was worse"? This is some of the greatest frustration for me as somebody not feeling particular loyalty to either the R's or D's. 4-8 years of bitching about how one side is so horrible on some issue... -Paul
[2021-06-14 17:48:58] - the number of "encounters" per day has gone up the past few months, so i feel like numbers would only help the case that biden is fucking up the border crisis. ~a
[2021-06-14 17:28:29] - mig: texassignal forgot to mention that trump ended his own zero tolerance policy that got into so much hot water. they (and i guess you?) seem to gloss over the differences between unaccompanied minors and family separation? in fact, the link seems to be missing numbers or counts or rates of any kind? ~a
[2021-06-14 17:16:06] - while we're talking about biden's record, another semi-regular reminder that immigrant children are still in cages with absolutely no transparency or oversight. - mig
[2021-06-14 15:46:11] - i think term limits on senators and congresspeople would be interesting. hopefully they'd pick a large number of terms as the limit. ~a
[2021-06-14 15:44:15] - the losses seem interesting too, i guess. in the first 100 days he failed to "build that wall", "drain the swamp", and "repeal and replace". did anything come of those after the first 100 days? i saw 47 miles out of ~1000 miles of the wall were built, so . . . no? ~a
[2021-06-14 15:38:22] - oops, that link is just the first 100 days? my god. ~a
[2021-06-14 15:14:39] - paul: here's usa today's take. i think it'd be cool if biden was able to undo #4 (environmental protection) and #5 (personal information), sure. ~a
[2021-06-14 15:13:13] - paul: it'd be more useful if we decided what specific stuff? what were trump's biggest wins? biden could pass a new tax law, but i doubt that will happen. he can't undo gorsuch, kavanaugh, or barrett (easily, or, at all really). operation warp speed? the zero tolerance policy at the border was mostly undone by trump himself. the "last muslim ban" was already revoked (on 2021-01-20). corporate subsidies? ~a
[2021-06-14 14:53:49] - Here's a hypothetical. How would you rank Biden if he basically undid all the bad stuff Trump did (I'll let you all decide for yourself what qualifies as bad stuff), but nothing else? In some ways that would be a massive accomplishment, but in others, I could see it being pretty disappointing and ineffectual. -Paul
[2021-06-14 14:01:30] - Paul: Yeah my guess is not all time great. I guess the chance at that would be somehow if the filibuster got removed and a bunch of stuff got passed that 50 years later or something everyone decides they love and so retroactively everyone thinks of Biden as some great moment in history or something. But I think much more likely is just like a normal president? Not great, not terrible. -Daniel
[2021-06-14 13:23:32] - Paul: He's been significantly better than I expected. But I expected a shitshow, so that's not a glowing endorsement. It turns out, I like it when Presidents stay the fuck in the office and don't make speeches very often. -- Xpovos
[2021-06-14 11:41:38] - paul: yeah too soon. Though as a prediction, I would say he probably would be one of the more ineffectual presidents of our time. - mig
[2021-06-13 23:39:12] - i'd also say that feels bold. i honestly thought he'd be worse, but it's still too soon to tell. comparing him to 4 years of a presidency is hard? after the first 100 days of trump's presidency, he had at least a few false statements ahead of him. ~a
[2021-06-13 23:32:21] - "silly" is *much* better than what i usually expect from the federal government. ~a
[2021-06-13 18:16:21] - Question: Where would you rank Biden so far as a President? It can be either all time or of our lifetime. Obviously it's too early to say, but I heard somebody suggest they think he might end up being considered an all time great and that felt bold to me. -Paul
[2021-06-13 18:14:48] - a: To be clear, I don't think anything is being held up here. In fact, one of the mailers confused us because it was about a tax refund we got like months ago. I guess that's better, but in some ways it feels even more silly. "You're welcome for the tax refund from the Biden admin!" -Paul
[2021-06-13 00:58:19] - im glad you added "justified"! like, what a dbag. biden's also a dbag if the mailings were his idea and he asked for the checks to be held up. ~a
[2021-06-11 14:07:52] - You know, for all the (justified) mockery Trump got over holding up checks until it could get his signature on it... I think I've gotten more mail informing me about the money the government is giving me during Biden's first year in office than all four Trump years. -Paul
[2021-06-09 16:45:44] - daniel: yeah if i'm feeling sleepy, i'll just sleep. don't wait for me if i'm not there at start time. thanks! ~a
[2021-06-09 16:43:17] - a: Also hope you feel better! Downside to getting back out in the world and near other people. Boo germs. -Daniel
[2021-06-09 16:42:57] - a: if you are sick you don't have to - was just checking. -Daniel
[2021-06-09 15:59:16] - Probably. I'm sick and I have another thing in the early evening but I'll probably make it on time. ~a
[2021-06-09 14:43:47] - a: You doing sc2 tonight? -Daniel
[2021-06-09 14:43:34] - Paul: think mine has skills then experience then education but its been awhile since I've had to use mine. -Daniel
[2021-06-09 14:19:25] - *or. ~a
[2021-06-09 14:19:09] - Also usually when I'm using a resume to filter it's usually along the lines of "oh I'm looking for a software person and you're clearly not that". instead I usually use resumes to find out how to tune your interview. you don't know java so we'll be taking about python or c++ or rust out whatever~a
[2021-06-09 14:14:38] - Mmmmm. Yes? Only because it's easier to find. If they don't care about it, they'll skip it. I usually only care if someone has a bachelor's or not. But honestly I'll probably be as critical either way. ~a
[2021-06-09 14:03:17] - a: Fair. Would you put skills and education at the top, followed by experience to flesh out the rest? I would think at this point in time education is less important but I've had people ask about it when they couldn't find it easily. -Paul
[2021-06-09 12:01:47] - Also I think this varies by field and region. I'm referring to our area and our field. ~a
[2021-06-09 11:59:47] - I almost never get one page resumes. One page resumes are fine for people graduating from college, but one page resumes for older adults are uncommon. I prefer to see two, but three is fine imo. I've gotten 10 page resumes and I write those people off immediately. ~a
[2021-06-09 01:45:14] - Question: At our stage in our careers (15+ years for the most part), does it still make sense to try to cram everything into one page resumes? Or are two pagers allowed? I feel like the latter is acceptable, but part of me likes the restriction of one page to stick to only relevant skills / experience. -Paul
[2021-06-07 19:40:12] - Daniel: Watching some of the Garrus romance scenes makes me really regret never playing FemShep. Garrus is the ultimate best bud companion for a male Shepard, but I have to admit that he's a great romantic interest as well. I get the appeal of Tali a bit, but she always seemed a little too much like a little sister to me. -Paul
[2021-06-07 19:15:43] - paul: skimming through the progress bar I think I would move garrus up as he is one of the few all three game options. Tali / Garrus / Liara I think are the default top three because they are available across all three games. Any other arc automatically feels lesser to me. -Daniel
[2021-06-07 19:13:15] - paul: 48 minutes! -Daniel
[2021-06-07 19:02:03] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWvKXkDP0wc A little long, but I'm curious if other ME players have thoughts on this. I thought it was generally solid, although I disagree with a few rankings. Full disclosure, I've never played FemShep and furthermore have only romanced 2 characters in my playthroughs, but I've watched a lot of YouTube videos of the other romances. -Paul
[2021-06-07 19:00:48] - a: Where Rand Paul said it's not necessary and Fauci strongly disagreed. And your takeaway was that Rand was an idiot doctor and somehow we got stuck on whether it was "known at the time". I think it's fair to say Rand was right there and there was sufficient evidence at the time. -Paul
[2021-06-07 18:57:13] - a: "i'd say that happened right around when things changed?" Sure, and now we're firmly in the realm of meaningless technicalities, but that's kind of my point. Around the time that there was enough evidence that the CDC felt confident removing mask mandates for vaccinated people, Rand Paul and Fauci had a heated argument over whether masks were necessary for vaccinated people. -Paul
[2021-06-07 17:19:43] - paul: "pretty soon after". i mean. i'm just guessing here? but i'd say that happened right around when things changed? ~a
[2021-06-07 17:19:35] - paul: you're probably right about the schools. i'll concede there. ~a
[2021-06-07 17:18:45] - paul: "CDC / Fauci / some authority says it?". nope! i'd trust any news source that i've heard of? (including fox news website and day-side. i guess not including fox news opinion or oann?). ~a
[2021-06-07 16:47:29] - a: Because I think I've shared a few links showing plenty of evidence that schools were probably safe to open back in 2020. As for the mask thing, the CDC announced changed guidance pretty soon after Fauci insisted that vaccinated people still needed to wear masks, so obviously there was some compelling evidence for the CDC to change guidance, no? -Paul
[2021-06-07 16:45:22] - a: "i don't know if we knew that at the time" Honest question: Do you only really consider us to have "known" something if the CDC / Fauci / some authority says it? That's totally reasonable, but it also makes it kind of impossible to make the point that we knew something before the authorities did. -Paul
[2021-06-07 15:58:41] - paul: "schools were safe to re-open" i don't know if we knew that at the time. did we? "Masks aren't necessary for the vaccinated" i'm not sure if we knew that at the time. with the high case rates we used to have (not the case rates we have today), i don't know if we know that even today. with businesses having no way to know who's vaccinated, i don't know if we know that even today either? ~a
[2021-06-07 13:40:23] - a: "how so?" All of the examples I laid out before? Schools were safe to re-open. Masks aren't necessary for the vaccinated. I get the argument that maybe the science wasn't 100% settled, but there was plenty of evidence pointing that way, even if the CDC / Fauci / whatever authority hadn't given it the stamp of approval yet. -Paul
[2021-06-05 14:34:49] - facebook's own policy of shutting down any discussion of the lab leak theory until they recently reversed it, is also, imo, dismissal in bad faith. - mig
[2021-06-05 02:13:02] - https://www.gofundme.com/f/save-aocs-abuelas-ancestral-home i thought this was pretty funny but not sure on effectiveness of the “own”. - mig
[2021-06-05 01:11:06] - a: i’d consider the original wapo article i linked earlier that described rhe lab leak theory as a “debunked conspiracy theory” to be dismissal in bad faith. - mig
[2021-06-04 19:29:34] - a: I don't - haven't looked at something like that before. -Daniel
[2021-06-04 18:41:21] - paul/daniel: do you guys know of any public json (or xml/yaml) file formats for storing financial information (transactions, holdings, assets, liabilities, accounts)? i'm looking for something like this or this, but like common to multiple systems? something like qif, but . . . more expressive / general? ~a
[2021-06-04 18:04:36] - "maybe it was worth considering alternative viewpoints instead of dismissing them in bad faith" who was dismissing in bad faith? ~a
[2021-06-04 18:00:25] - "for some of these things, apparently we did" how so? ~a
[2021-06-04 18:00:03] - a: I'm sympathetic to the idea that "we didn't know at the time". However, for some of these things, apparently we did. And even if we didn't know, my point still stands that maybe it was worth considering alternative viewpoints instead of dismissing them in bad faith... especially now looking back that so many turned out to be credible. -Paul
[2021-06-04 17:58:03] - https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/new-york-times-covid-19-reporter-doesnt-want-to-talk-about-racist-wuhan-lab-theory Just a few days ago, a reporter for the NYT who covers COVID had a tweet talking about how the lab origin theory has racist roots. -Paul
[2021-06-04 17:57:53] - i'm not sure if that last part came out right. ugh, nm. ~a
[2021-06-04 17:57:00] - paul: you're trying to take information we know today and apply it to a debate people were having in the past. that will always be unfair. you have to use information that people had at the time. it is just "being cautious". just because people really wanted a thing to be true, and (yes) sometimes they were half-right about some of those things, doesn't mean that they were right. ~a
[2021-06-04 17:56:06] - a: I didn't see all of those attacks strung together in a single charge, but sure. During the heart of the pandemic that was all over the media (social and otherwise). Teacher's unions were saying parents wanted to put them in danger just to get babysitters. The re-opening protests were slammed as a bunch of COVID denying idiots who wanted to go to bars... -Paul
[2021-06-04 17:54:10] - a: I mean, even now you're saying Rand Paul was an idiot even though it sounds like even you admit he was right about all of those things and Fauci was wrong. That's not just "being cautious". -Paul
[2021-06-04 17:54:02] - paul: you know this is an obvious straw man. "you're an idiot anti-science person who wants to murder grandma just to drink a beer" did someone say something like this? yes, sure. but fauci never said "you're an idiot anti-science person". fauci said a bunch of half-truths at a time where we didn't know everything, but none of them were anything along the lines of "you're an idiot anti-science person" ~a
[2021-06-04 17:53:00] - a: I mean, what if I said every month, "You're an idiot if you don't sell all your stocks, a market crash is coming" and then like 30 months from now you're like, "Are you tired of being wrong?". I could say I'm just being cautious, but at some point maybe I should be a little less convinced about the rightness of my positions. -Paul
[2021-06-04 17:51:44] - a: And I'm not even saying let's go back in time and change anything, because obviously that's impossible. I'm just a little surprised there hasn't been a little more humility around things. Beto tweeted about Texas re-opening that it was a "death warrant", and COVID cases have just continued to go down. -Paul
[2021-06-04 17:49:32] - a: I was going to say, "this isn't about being cautious", but I guess on some level it is. I'm fine with being cautious, but I think the issue is that the debate has been framed as a choice between "be super cautious" vs "you're an idiot anti-science person who wants to murder grandma just to drink a beer". -Paul
[2021-06-04 17:46:44] - a: The COVID origins thing is still obviously up for debate, but that's a significant change from before when the general consensus was, "this is not up for debate" -Paul
[2021-06-04 17:45:53] - a: And if you watch the video from the tweet about masking, it heavily implies that at the time Rand Paul and Fauci had their disagreement about masks, he knew it was okay to not wear it (and the CDC change came out soon thereafter), so if you consider Fauci an infectious diseases expert maybe that counts? -Paul
[2021-06-04 17:44:40] - a: I'm open to having my mind changed, but I've heard from a lot of people I respect that the data has been pretty clear for a while now about it being pretty safe to open schools. The article I posted linked to this NPR article from last year: https://www.npr.org/2020/10/21/925794511/were-the-risks-of-reopening-schools-exaggerated -Paul
[2021-06-04 17:42:50] - a: Lol yeah that seems like a questionable ad. -Daniel
[2021-06-04 17:35:19] - regarding ford: twitter ~a
[2021-06-04 15:35:24] - paul: but i'm still not sure if i would have change facebook or twitter policy knowing what i know now. ~a
[2021-06-04 15:35:10] - paul: we were bound to have taken masks off too early, or too late. we were bound to have kids back in school too early, or too late. even knowing what we know now i'm not sure any of those are true for sure. the "origin story" of covid was bound to change. yes, it sucks that facebook and twitter blocked some people speculating with zero evidence, and some of those people were broken clocks, being right. ~a
[2021-06-04 15:31:49] - paul: if, after like what, 4 million deaths? if you (paul, paul) think we were being too cautious, i'm totally fine with that. i'm glad we were too cautious. if we had erred on the other side, things would have been much worse. iow, if these are the WORST examples of fauci being wrong OR rand being right, i count my lucky stars. ~a
[2021-06-04 15:31:46] - paul: even knowing what i know now, i'd still say this was an apt description of what happened: "Rand Paul was a confrontational idiot eye doctor who was trying to say he knows better than the nation's top expert on infectious diseases". he had, like zero infectious experts to back him up, right? (your article didn't mention any) broken clocks being right twice per day and whatnot? ~a
[2021-06-04 14:52:41] - By the way, I never realized until a few days ago just how much the Mass Effect writers had a hard-on for vaguely named macguffin that start with the letter 'C': Cipher, Conduit, Catalyst, Crucible, Citadel, Codex, Council, Consort, Cerebus, Calibrations.... okay, so maybe those last few don't count. -Paul
[2021-06-04 14:45:54] - It's just frustrating to see so many things where the media / politicians / cdc / big tech companies / etc were not only wrong about, but the way they treated those who thought otherwise. People who thought it could be released from a lab were racist conspiracy theorists. Texas / Florida was committing genocide by re-opening. Cuomo and NY had the best COVID response. And so on. -Paul
[2021-06-04 14:42:00] - And the completely lack of humility looking back and realizing how wrong they were and that maybe it was okay to speculate on things like COVID coming from a lab or that vaccinated people don't need to wear masks or schools could've been opened sooner or other things. -Paul
[2021-06-04 14:41:04] - But the more we're finding out now about a whole bunch of stuff, the more I'm getting annoyed not necessarily at the changing opinions, but at the way politicians and the media and big tech had so condescendingly decided what opinions were "right" and allowed to be shared back then which turned out to be completely wrong now. -Paul
[2021-06-04 14:39:39] - And that coverage was: "Rand Paul is a confrontational idiot eye doctor who is trying to say he knows better than the nation's top expert on infectious diseases" And that's actually what I thought too at the time (I know Rand Paul can be confrontational and he certainly didn't cover himself in glory during the Trump years). -Paul
[2021-06-04 14:38:26] - https://fee.org/articles/rand-paul-has-won-every-single-round-against-fauci/ This is a follow-up to something I mentioned a week or two ago. Even if the site is biased (it probably is), I do think there's a lot of truth to the argument being made. I saw how the news media covered the Rand Paul / Fauci clashes and it was pretty unanimous... -Paul
[2021-06-04 13:43:26] - on the other hand, i have a bike race super early tomorrow morning (i hit the paths at 6:00, starting gun is at 7:00), and i'll be doing all of that with a cold, and pollen, and the backache, and the fucking cicadas
~a[2021-06-04 13:41:32] - yeah, the silver lining is all four of my things this week should be gone in a month or less (knock on wood). ~a
[2021-06-04 13:34:21] - a: Oof, sorry to hear. My lower back has been killing me lately, but it's been more than just this week and probably because I'm old. Luckily my allergies haven't been that bad. -Paul
[2021-06-04 13:18:17] - so, i got a really bad backache on monday that has lasted allll week. and i caught a cold the same day. it has also lasted all week. my pollen allergies are the absolute worst. the cicadas here (in arlington) are fucking everywhere. this has been quite the week. ~a
[2021-06-04 03:07:34] - a: Okay, cool, so it sounds like index funds are better tax-wise than actively managed funds in that respect. Thanks. -Paul
[2021-06-03 19:51:53] - paul: from vanguard on this issue: "You also may want to consider investing in index funds, which tend to buy and sell less often, leading to fewer realized gains and losses" ~a
[2021-06-03 19:49:14] - paul: for vtsax i'd expect this number to be very low. they'll only sell when there is an IPO (or when people sell vtsax). sears and whatnot don't "leave" vtsax, the shares just sit there and get smaller. ~a
[2021-06-03 19:42:26] - there's also 401k loan for this situation, which i think is kinda elegant. (but obviously bad if you're using it to fuck-over your own retirement). you pay interest . . . to yourself! if there are any fees, i probably wouldn't do it. ~a
[2021-06-03 19:37:07] - daniel: i think i saw stuff like "i can't spend money in my 401k until i'm 59.5" and "I'm not sure how more 401k helps me spend today" and was trying to argue against these things that are probably true for you, but wrong in general? ~a
[2021-06-03 19:31:19] - daniel: i don't plan on using sepp. i was maybe just arguing the "math optimal way"? ~a
[2021-06-03 19:30:42] - a: I think its fair that it might not be the math optimal way. But its also not super time consuming where I have to figure out a sepp and deal with that so maybe its the lazy right thing? -Daniel
[2021-06-03 19:30:09] - daniel: something like 99% of my bitcoin transactions have been in taxable accounts. ~a
[2021-06-03 19:29:28] - daniel: i'm sure you're doing the right thing. maybe i didn't add enough qualifiers. there are a shit-ton of situations where having more money in a taxable account is a good thing. ~a
[2021-06-03 19:28:06] - (if that)
[2021-06-03 19:27:35] - a: Right but outside of extremes I'm not sure I want to deal with a sepp to get 5k dollars. -Daniel
[2021-06-03 19:26:49] - daniel: "I'm not sure how more 401k helps me spend today" if i had a billion dollars in my 401k and $0 in my taxable, i'd start a sepp today. ~a
[2021-06-03 19:26:37] - My taxable (non gambling money) is to bridge early retirement to 401k time. -Daniel
[2021-06-03 19:26:10] - a: I don't think thats true for me. -Daniel
[2021-06-03 19:25:50] - daniel: more 401k creates less of a need for taxable. ~a
[2021-06-03 19:25:19] - The assumption being that more 401k creates extra taxable? But I'm not sure if that is true if the point of the taxable is to bridge time until you get to your 401k. -Daniel
[2021-06-03 19:24:48] - a: If there isn't extra money in your taxable bucket then I'm not sure having more money in your 401k still helps spend money today? I get there are hoops you can jump through to spend 401k money today and that is where I wondered if those were better or worse than short term gains but outside of that I'm not sure how more 401k helps me spend today. -Daniel
[2021-06-03 19:23:56] - paul: i don't know? there is a "captial gains" distribution type (one for short term and one for long term), but i only seem to get those on my bond funds. my vague answer: its gets distributed exactly the same as in retirement accounts. unlike your retirement accounts, though, they get taxed via 1099-div, i'm just not sure how (i would have expected 2a: total capital gain distr, but, again, that seems blank for stock funds). ~a
[2021-06-03 19:08:30] - a: How do index funds work with taxes in non-tax advantaged accounts? If you own an S&P 500 index fund and it sells shares of... Sears to rebalance the fund.... do you get capital gains or losses? Or does it only work if/when you sell shares of the index fund? -Paul
[2021-06-03 18:27:49] - daniel: "I'm not sure for me that having more $ in 401k means I need less in my taxable" i guess this touches on my overall argument: that it does. having more money in your 401k means you need less in your taxable. less than *what* might be the decision maker i think? its hard (or impossible) to know how much money you'll need in either bucket. ~a
[2021-06-03 18:23:52] - daniel: and regarding the overall point: "Infinite money in my 401k doesn't give me more money to spend now though" completely ignores all the other numerous & probable situations you can find yourself in: all of those situations where you don't have zero money in either bucket. ~a
[2021-06-03 18:22:22] - daniel: i disagree with your overall point, and disagree with you on the details. you can get to your 401k before you're 59.5 using, like a bunch of methods, not even counting ways with penalties. there's sepp, there's roth rollover ladder, there's 401k loan, there's hardship withdrawal, and i think there's a first time home buyer withdrawal (but i forget what the last one is called). and those five are just off the top of my head. ~a
[2021-06-03 18:16:36] - I guess the thing to look at would be whats the tax hit for withdrawing some amount of money from say a roth account early and is that less than short term capital gains? I don't know the answer to that off hand. -Daniel
[2021-06-03 18:16:01] - a: Infinite money in my 401k doesn't give me more money to spend now though. Money is fungible but between buckets its not? I can't spend money in my 401k until I'm 59.5. I think the assumption is that if I have more in my 401k then I need less in my taxable account thus can blow that money on a swank tv or w/e? But I'm not sure for me that having more $ in 401k means I need less in my taxable. -Daniel
[2021-06-03 17:04:56] - but i do def see how that's a difficult thing to manage. ~a
[2021-06-03 17:03:43] - daniel: wellll, kinda? if you ignore the whole psychology of it, you totally can. if you do insanely well on the money you have in your 401k, then you don't have to rely as much on your taxable accounts. worded differently, i'd far prefer to have $10 in my tax-shelter + $2 in my taxable, than $3 in each. ~a
[2021-06-03 16:59:11] - a: I think its just that if I do well on a trade in a 401k I can't get that money to do something silly / fun for 10 more years. If I do well on meme stocks now I can take out proceeds pay taxes and then buy a new 4k tv this year. -Daniel
[2021-06-03 16:50:00] - daniel: yeah i get it. there's a certain concept that i don't totally understand: the psychology of money. or, meta money? where you're like . . . i sold my (insert fun thing) last year, and used that money to buy a (insert other fun thing) this year. money is fungible, so it doesn't need to be that way, but psychology is weird especially when you're weighing other wants+needs (and sometimes including other people in the discussion) ~a
[2021-06-03 16:33:54] - a: Not all my trades are super short either. I could see holding Ford for awhile to see how the EV pickup stuff shakes out. Things like GME / AMC / etc I would be surprised if I held that for a year. -Daniel
[2021-06-03 16:32:06] - a: I totally get the point of that theory. However if I'm to the point of gambling then I want to be able to blow my winnings on video games and tv's or some such if I get it right. -Daniel
[2021-06-03 16:14:49] - a: Some people at the Fool have (half jokingly, I assume) suggested something like an 80% tax on super short term holding periods, and then have it phase out as the holding period increases until you get to something like 3 years, where there are no taxes at all. The theory being to incentivize long term investing. -Paul
[2021-06-03 16:10:30] - paul: maaaybe it should be! it encourages a less volatile world. but, i'd instead suggest daniel just make a small change: do individual trades in an ira or 401k. i make short-term individual trades on occasion: rarely, i usually follow a more paul-like strategy. but i always make them in a 401k or ira, so i pay 0% on each individual trade and pay taxes once, at a different time. ~a
[2021-06-03 16:10:22] - My thoughts on Tesla vs Ford right now are: Do I think they will own 100% of the EV market? No. But would I bet on any of the big legacy companies (GM, Ford, etc) to be able to make the pivot and take significant market share? Also no. -Paul
[2021-06-03 16:08:46] - a: "this is taxed very harshly" *Libertarian nods in vigorous agreement* -Paul
[2021-06-03 16:08:09] - a: "what is your investing style now?" Now I like to buy high quality companies (even if they seem overvalued) which I have a high conviction will continue to grow over the long term. -Paul
[2021-06-03 16:01:58] - a: Yeah I know. Woo taxes? -Daniel
[2021-06-03 15:57:29] - Daniel :"I don't think the cybertruck is going to be the EV of choice for most people who drive pickups" I think you could be right, however, I was also shocked by the number of Cybertruck pre-orders (around 1 million!? https://electrek.co/2021/05/25/tesla-cybertruck-reservations-1-million-electric-pickup-trucks/) -Paul
[2021-06-03 15:44:53] - daniel: i'm sure you already know this, but might not be thinking about it right now: you are making strictly short-term trades. this is taxed very harshly. compared to making these trades in an ira/401k, you're paying something like like +25% on the gains of your trades (this is the marginal rate, and assumes a lot about your situation, but is fine for a rule-of-thumb). ~a
[2021-06-03 15:32:58] - ford is +6% today
~a[2021-06-03 15:31:49] - paul/daniel: i also think the cybertruck won't catch on (even though i hold tsla, and have zero shares of f). i agree that nobody knows for sure. ~a
[2021-06-03 15:27:10] - paul: "But that's not my investing style anymore" so you're no longer the contrarian looking for established brands ripe for a comeback. what is your investing style now? ~a
[2021-06-03 15:06:21] - Paul: I don't think the cybertruck is going to be the EV of choice for most people who drive pickups. However I suppose that will be figured out in the future! -Daniel
[2021-06-03 14:26:12] - Daniel: Not yet, but I believe the Cybertruck is supposed to come out before Ford's electric truck. -Paul
[2021-06-03 13:44:07] - Paul: Does Tesla have any market share when it comes to pickups? Pickups are a pretty big deal. Ford doesn't have to win the EV market for sedans to still be successful. -Daniel
[2021-06-03 03:05:03] - a: Honestly, though, I keep wondering if maybe I should just sell all my shares of Tesla. The run the past year or so was simply insane and so much optimism seems already priced in. Feels like falling short of total EV domination + full self driving taxis is going to cause underperformance. Musk is also a bit too much of a loose cannon for me and I worry they could effectively get kicked out of China. -Paul
[2021-06-03 02:55:57] - a: But that's not my investing style anymore. Just seems hard for me to envision Ford being able to take any significant market share from Tesla in EVs, and that doesn't leave a lot left. -Paul
[2021-06-03 02:55:13] - a: Yeah, I don't know. Tesla is around 10x the size of Ford right now, so it's hard for me to say with confidence they will outperform Ford going forward.... but I definitely wouldn't feel good being a Ford investor right now. I get the appeal. I used to be a contrarian / value investor type looking for established brands that could make a comeback... -Paul
[2021-06-03 01:29:33] - paul: yes. but they've both had fucking crazy returns since then. ford has almost doubled. ~a
[2021-06-02 19:25:07] - a: Hah, I think Ford has outperformed Tesla since 2020-10-15? -Paul
[2021-06-02 18:19:31] - on 2020-10-15 we had a long conversation about ford vs tesla.
~a[2021-06-02 18:17:31] - paul has made the case *against* ford, tons of times. i wonder if he still feels this way? ~a
[2021-06-02 18:16:08] - Ford! Though its less crazy. I think electric pickups will be good for it. We'll see~ -Daniel
[2021-06-02 17:44:33] - what did you buy next?
~a[2021-06-02 17:30:15] - Sadly I didn't hold it till now I sold at like 27. /shrug Crazy stocks go crazy but I made a bit off it at least. -Daniel
[2021-06-02 17:04:10] - hah wow. he did say (a few weeks ago) that he sold gme to buy amc, wtf, nice. ~a
[2021-06-02 17:03:23] - Daniel: You own AMC?
-Paul[2021-06-02 17:01:38] - a: Congrats on crushing it so far. I might be paying up this year unless Teladoc can make a comeback. -Paul
[2021-06-02 17:01:06] - a: Hah! I literally just updated it because I was looking at it and noticed the problem. -Paul
[2021-06-02 16:54:27] - paul: here is some news that describes the N/A on the stock-market challenge. ~a
[2021-06-02 16:43:01] - a: I agree with a fair number of those reddit posts. Lots of self-help sayings might have some truth to them, but I feel like they way too oversimplify things. -Paul
[2021-06-02 16:35:47] - And one of our victims was a diamond team. -Paul
[2021-06-02 16:35:18] - More impressively, like 75% of those games people tried to cheese us. We survived a double proxy barracks, a cannon rush, a proxy stargate / shield battery. zergling rushes... -Paul
[2021-06-02 16:20:25] - haha, yay. i'm so close to getting to platinum in 3v3 and 1v1 i can taste it. also, i'm totally 100% sick right now, so i'm kinda glad i didn't reply to emails; i might have joined instead of sleeping. downside to ditching the masks is we can catch colds now. yay! my small rando brag is that i'm very close to taking 1st place in the stock market challenge. ~a
[2021-06-02 16:04:48] - a: Small rando brag but in SC2 last night Paul, Mark, and I went like 6-0 against people playing 3v3. It was a good run.
-Daniel[2021-06-02 15:52:48] - paul: i found some more critical info on roundabouts. you maybe shouldn't add roundabouts if you need more than one lane, or high speed traffic, or if the traffic flows aren't balanced on all approaches, or if waiting vehicles (like during rush-hour) would obstruct pedestrians, or if you're worried about visually-impaired pedestrians, or near an at-grade train crossing, there are a lot more places where they apparently don't work . . . ~a
[2021-06-02 15:36:08] - what's some popular self-care/self-love advice that is actually really toxic? from about a week ago. the top answers are fairly insightful, and i've definitely heard people say some of these. ~a
[2021-06-02 15:29:28] - paul: yeah. biggest thing was that it didn't talk enough about the downsides. (but also, i saw zero examples of dense urban cities . . . except the "bad examples". and, zero examples of high-pedestrian areas. too many examples of suburban or highways. carmel, indiana, for example is a suburb of indianapolis surrounded by highways) ~a
[2021-06-02 15:24:35] - a: "the stossel thing didn't help my views though: if anything it seemed a bit biased" That's interesting. A bit biased for roundabouts? I mean, I guess in some ways it is since it was clearly trying to make the case. -Paul
[2021-06-02 15:17:46] - yeah, i think i was already sold when traffic engineers in the US were pushing them pretty hard in bike-lane meetings i went to. they made good points and i basically liked them already. the stossel thing didn't help my views though: if anything it seemed a bit biased. on the other hand, i tried to find evidence against roundabouts and that only reinforced my opinion that (small-only) roundabouts are better when you have the space. ~a
[2021-06-02 14:18:05] - a: https://www.johnstossel.com/roundabouts-are-better/ Here's a recap of some of the benefits to roundabouts. I'm starting to get sold... -Paul
[2021-06-02 01:52:30] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/16/tom-cotton-coronavirus-conspiracy/ "Earlier versions of this story and its headline inaccurately characterized comments by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) regarding the origins of the coronavirus. The term “debunked” and The Post’s use of “conspiracy theory” have been removed because, then as now, there was no determination about the origins of the virus." - mig
[2021-06-01 19:28:10] - https://i.redd.it/w43v7ijbhn271.png
[2021-06-01 17:59:31] - It's nice to know that no matter how far we go when it comes to identity politics, some things will always be acceptable to be made fun of. -- Xpovos
[2021-06-01 17:59:00] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJfHF312STE je suis fatigué -- Xpovos
[2021-06-01 15:11:54] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxK8VbIVnFs Man, this video of an ME interaction gets surprisingly deep (and oddly relevant to the current moment) by the end. -Paul
[2021-06-01 05:16:29] - mig: And while Garrus WAS a cop, he quit because he didn't want to be play by their rules AND he is a Turian, and they were the reason the Williams name is mud. Seems pretty reasonable. -Paul
[2021-06-01 05:15:31] - mig: Yeah, she distrusts allowing a bunch of aliens full access to the Alliance's top secret ship, but upon replaying, I think she has a point. Wrex is a mercenary, Tali is some rando migrant, Liara is the daughter of the enemy... -Paul
[2021-06-01 05:12:46] - mig: I have a theory about Ashley. Maybe it's less about her being some overt "space racist" and more that people think she is, well, Republican? She makes a big deal about how her father and grandfather were both military AND she also points out how her belief in God is important to her. -Paul
[2021-06-01 00:47:39] - mig: Yeah, I have no idea. It sounds like some people are misunderstanding it to think that the vaccine is somehow harmful? I dunno. -Paul
[2021-06-01 00:01:35] - paul: i’m a little lost as to what the significance is of “shedding protein”. - mig
[2021-05-31 15:40:48] - But it's also expensive to switch from a traffic light to a roundabout because of the extra land and possibly moving utility lines and other stuff. -Paul
[2021-05-31 03:46:13] - a: Yeah, the biggest (clear) downside seems to be taking up more space. It sounds like not a ton of research has been done, but most evidence points to them being more efficient all around. Oh, they're bad for self-driving cars too. -Paul
[2021-05-31 01:27:42] - paul: why should we use roundabouts? when i'm on my bike i think i like them for the same reason as by car: no waiting. i have to imagine there are downsides though. they seem to take up more space, right? ~a
[2021-05-30 21:21:13] - https://twitter.com/AndySwan/status/1398685666779844617 Yet one more example of why Twitter maybe shouldn't be deciding what viewpoints are acceptable and which are disinformation. -Paul
[2021-05-30 21:13:08] - a: I was listening to a Freakonomics podcast yesterday about roundabouts and how we should use them instead of traffic lights. -Paul
prev <-> next