The only reason we switched from doing our own to paying a CPA is when my wife started operating her own business. This was more to have someone to ask questions about making sure she covers all of her tax obligations who can answer authoritatively and back us up if anything comes back to us in the future (since she is sole prop. and going it alone). We paid $200 the first year, and considering turbotax would have been about that much, getting our taxes filed for us was practically just a bonus. She charges a little more now, but it’s still worth it IMO just to not have to deal with doing the actual paperwork and having someone who will help us out if anything does come back to us. I would say anyone who just has W2 income and maybe some stock sales doesn’t have a complicated enough situation to warrant a CPA, and should just use FreeTaxUSA (and hopefully over the next couple years, the auto filing program with the government will eliminate the need for that, too).

it feels like treading water and then rather suddenly having a credible chance.

That’s a good reminder. Just haven’t had one of those years yet. Thanks for the perspective.

I didn’t think an expense ratio of 0.08% was considered high?

Everyone always quotes the growth of the S&P500, but isn’t pretty much no one 100% invested for their entire retirement in the S&P500? My 401k is in a target date 2055 and my Roth is split between FXAIX (S&P500, 55%), FSPSX (international, 20%), FSMAX (extended market, 15%), FXNAX (bonds, 10%). It’s a little conservative but not that conservative.

Fidelity says my Roth 1Y returns are 10.8% compared to S&P 500’s 10.3%. It says my 1Y returns on my target date 2055 are 18.0%. Neither of those numbers can be accurate so it’s hard to know what to read in to them. If I try to calculate my returns in a very simple way (take current value, subtract contributions from the last 12 months, which can be easily looked up, call that number X, then find the growth rate that takes the account value I had as Nov. 1st last year and compound that at different rates until it produces X as of now - this gives an upper bound on returns, since the returns of the various money deposited throughout the year at random times is treated as not growing at all), I get 1%. And that’s 1% before inflation.

I know the S&P500 is 10% YoY over really long time scales, and I also know that number is like +/-15% year to year. But it feels like my fund picks are pretty normal yet they’re not worth any more than what I put in to them since I started saving. Because of that, I’d have to have a 30+% savings rate in order to catch up to the “X salary by Y age” rule because the assumptions over the growth rate of the accounts are wildly off in the years since I started investing.

Thoughts? I have to admit I’ve been nervous about this for a while now, with “once in a generation” events happening on a seemingly yearly basis, I started saving for retirement in 2019 and it seems like things have essentially traded sideways since then - my accounts are barely worth more than the money I’ve put in to them. The article is quite gloomy.

Unfortunately you can’t just recuse yourself from society. You’re still impacted by who the president is even if you don’t vote for them.

You’re still using public utilities. Driving on public roads. Interacting with people who went to public schools.

Acting like both choices are the same because they will always eventually do something you don’t like is disingenuous and you know it.

The people I know who’ve given up on housing affordability unfortunately are not shifting in to retirement. They’re so hopeless they blow their money on hobbies because they don’t foresee any possible path to homeownership or retirement and value a few bucks here and there on discretionary spending more.

I am surprised the age would be so young. My dad retired at 67 but went right back to work a year later, still working now (71). Health insurance do be expensive. I wonder how this statistic would capture someone like him. My mother was working until she died at 60, but would have likely been in a similar situation, trying to keep working as long as possible, certainly was not looking at retirement within a year or two.

My wife’s parents are younger (late 50s) but in the same boat, there is no path to retirement for them and they plan to just keep working. The only people I know who managed to retire by any conventional definition are or were Silent Generation.

Also if a quick Google result is anything to go on, Apple sells hundreds of millions of iPhones a year. 3% of that is still a fuckload of people and IMO proves there is a market for it. Just maybe not a market that needs yearly attention. You also have to remember that’s split between tons of SKUs, so you would expect all of them to hover in the single digits to low teens.

I got my wife a 12 Mini - she loves it. The battery life is absolutely the worst thing about it, but it sounds like the 13 Mini was a huge upgrade in that regard and I had hopes it would continue to get better with future versions.

Something else that may not be taken in to account - the kinds of people buying the Mini are I would wager on a longer upgrade period than the kinds of people who buy e.g. a base iPhone or Pro model. The kind of person buying a Mini I would bet is closer to the kind of buyer that has historically bought the SE - they probably only upgrade every 3 or 4 years rather than the more stereotypical 2. Pro numbers are also skewed by the hyper fans who upgrade yearly and therefore show up in the stats a lot more, even though they’re both a firm Apple customer.

There is also this interesting note at the end of the article:

“Other reports … overwhelmingly presented the same picture of low ‌iPhone 14‌ Plus sales, to the extent that Apple was forced to slash production, suggesting that the low sales of the ‌iPhone 12 mini‌ and ‌iPhone 13‌ mini may not have been caused by the device’s size after all.”

I think the Mini should become the new SE. Keep it on 2+ year old CPU, keep it 60Hz, at least the form factor and design language will match the rest of the lineup unlike now where the SE has a design from 2016. That would be perfect for people like my wife, who want the smallest cheapest phone that’s technically an iPhone, and are only going to upgrade every few years.

Would absolutely have been impossible for us without money from my mother’s trust (deceased) and my father. Even living cheaply, with a very good deal on an apartment that we luckily locked in as COVID started and rent increases were put on moratorium, the appreciation of properties was so aggressive that saving $1300 a month meant we were actually losing ground on hitting a 20% down-payment on half decent starter homes. We desperately need the housing bubble to burst, but it’s not even “”“really”“” a bubble.

Might be silly but I honestly just use Excel. I could do with some more features or automatic calculations for certain things but I like to just be able to tinker with data.

This thread is an amusing display of sample bias. Only people that want to respond yes and brag about it bothering to respond.

In reality only about 2/3rds of people in the US can drive stick and almost no one owns manual cars.

I’ve never driven a manual car. I’ve had people be like “You can’t drive manual?!” and then I would respond “So are you going to teach me?” The answer is always No, of course not, not in their car (assuming they even owned a manual, which none do anymore). My parents had manual cars but sold them 10+ years before having me.

I understand how a clutch works. It wouldn’t be difficult to learn. But what reason or motivation is there to learn when almost no cars are manual? They total something like 2% of new car sales. If you’re buying something like a 718 GT4 RS or a 911 GT3 RS for maximum driving engagement that’s great, but those cars are priced for the 1% of the 1%.

Even if you had a fun car, which I do, the drive to work is stop-and-go, roads are full, even the fun country backroads are filled with traffic on weekends, forests are burned down, gas is eye-watteringly expensive if you have a slightly performant vehicle. The time to have fun driving cars was 40 years ago.

This is why it’s useful at the account level. It’s also useful at the post level in order to build a sorting algorithm which raises the most engaging/important/interesting submissions to the top. Within a community it is important to help define what that community is - irrelevant and low effort content is suppressed and relevant/high-effort gets boosted. Moderators can enforce this by just removing and pinning too, but that’s almost always too unilateral, and the voting system is generally better because it’s expected that then you get a representation of how people in that community feel about it. It’s a good system.