11–20 of 214 posts
Of course he was also a lier (vapor ware). And a cut throat business man.
You might like nowadays Bill Gates philanthropist, but there is a reason people hated him for decades. I don’t understand why retrospectives on him ignore this side.
I am not sure this is all the story, the specific way in which you bet matters too.
Consider investing in daily leveraged ETFs in contrast with non-leveraged ones, for example.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I personally don’t invest on margin. It just feels weird to take a short-term loan (whatever the interest rate) when I have the cash to cover the loan. And if I don’t have the cash to cover the margin loan, I should be working on increasing my emergency fund instead. In short, there’s no set of circumstances where my decision tree comes down on the side of taking the loan.
> It just feels weird to take a short-term loan (whatever the interest rate) when I have the cash to cover the loan. And if I don’t have the cash to cover the margin loan, I should be working on increasing my emergency fund instead. I see. Would your thinking change if your emergency fund was sufficiently large but much smaller than your investable cash? For example, let's say your rainy day fund was $10, and you hav…
In my opinion, and practice, emergency funds should not be used for investments ever, this includes covering the losses from investing. Yes it can feel like you are not maximizing your returns on that amount of money but its job isn't to generate returns, it is your help smooth out the bumps in the road of life for you. In my experience life can punch hard and it never throws just one punch, it is usually a 1,2,3 combo. That emergency fund is merely there to help raise the chances of you standing on your feet after the vicious flurry.
If you want leverage and you are in the US or have a US based brokerage account use options. By using options your all in is basically the cost of the option and this ensures you will not ever lose more than you paid. PLEASE note the previous sentence is predicated on the golden rule of NEVER WRITE an uncovered/naked option, seriously do not do it!!!! I also use the 5% rule, which no one trade is more than 5% of my portfolio so no one trade will destroy me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I actually have a somewhat controversial opinion (that shouldn’t be controversial because it’s all math, but it still is regardless) that, after you save 5-6x your emergency fund, you don’t need an emergency fund at all and you’re better off investing it all in a total market index fund. The reason being that even if there is a market crash, you’ll still be able to afford the emergency since you’ve saved multiples of…
I’ve thought about this too, and came to a different conclusion. The primary reason is just because the markets haven’t collapsed more than 85% over a months long period before, doesn’t mean it won’t in the future. And, my marginal utility for money gets so high below a certain level, that it’s not worth risking this outcome when the marginal utility of more money is relatively smaller.
One question that's been top of mind lately for me is how optimistic you should be in your investing strategy. IBK currently allows retail investors to trade on margin with an annual interest rate of only 1% (yes, really). You can borrow up to 2x your principle at this rate. If you were extremely optimistic, you would borrow 2x your principal and expect to 3x your annual return. If you were optimistic but wanted to a…
I personally don’t invest on margin. It just feels weird to take a short-term loan (whatever the interest rate) when I have the cash to cover the loan. And if I don’t have the cash to cover the margin loan, I should be working on increasing my emergency fund instead. In short, there’s no set of circumstances where my decision tree comes down on the side of taking the loan.
I am personally too risk adverse to go taking loans all the time. But I can imagine it being a good option.
> You could tell three things about Bill Gates pretty quickly. He was really smart. He was really competitive; he wanted to show you how smart he was. And he was really, really persistent. Of course he was also a lier (vapor ware). And a cut throat business man. You might like nowadays Bill Gates philanthropist, but there is a reason people hated him for decades. I don’t understand why retrospectives on him ignore th…
You could say the same thing about any business person. And the bigger the business the bigger are the qualities you mentioned (or should I say they just cause bigger effect). It is obvious. Also it is not reserved specifically for business person.
> You could tell three things about Bill Gates pretty quickly. He was really smart. He was really competitive; he wanted to show you how smart he was. And he was really, really persistent. Of course he was also a lier (vapor ware). And a cut throat business man. You might like nowadays Bill Gates philanthropist, but there is a reason people hated him for decades. I don’t understand why retrospectives on him ignore th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve thought about this too, and came to a different conclusion. The primary reason is just because the markets haven’t collapsed more than 85% over a months long period before, doesn’t mean it won’t in the future. And, my marginal utility for money gets so high below a certain level, that it’s not worth risking this outcome when the marginal utility of more money is relatively smaller.
Yeah, it’s essentially just estimating the probability of you getting an emergency which coincides with a total market collapse so horrific it reduces your semi-liquid net worth to less than your emergency. I’m at a point where I’m ok with that risk. At some point you would be too: 85%? 90%? 99%? Clearly we agree Jeff Bezos doesn’t need 6 months cash on hand at all times. So the limit is somewhere. I think a total ma…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve thought about this too, and came to a different conclusion. The primary reason is just because the markets haven’t collapsed more than 85% over a months long period before, doesn’t mean it won’t in the future. And, my marginal utility for money gets so high below a certain level, that it’s not worth risking this outcome when the marginal utility of more money is relatively smaller.
Yeah, it’s essentially just estimating the probability of you getting an emergency which coincides with a total market collapse so horrific it reduces your semi-liquid net worth to less than your emergency. I’m at a point where I’m ok with that risk. At some point you would be too: 85%? 90%? 99%? Clearly we agree Jeff Bezos doesn’t need 6 months cash on hand at all times. So the limit is somewhere. I think a total ma…
I don’t follow the logic here. It doesn’t need to reduce your funds anywhere near the emergency amount.
If it reduces your investments to 3x your emergency you were just forced to sell 1/3 of your portfolio at what is potentially the lowest point.