*Investors Blog*

AG, why is that? Is it the 330+ days of sunshine? Is it all the Teslas running around?

It's because of the opportunity; aka money. A small property like mine wouldn't cost $2M and sell in less than 1 week if there wasn't strong demand. And I guarantee it's not because any of those prospective buyers think I'm cute...

But you are spot on; it is Capitalism at work.
Location, location, location
It’s always locations
 
And that's how a person gets ahead and retires rich.

We did much the same thing. As one of my surgeon colleagues remarked, "What, you live beneath your means." Guilty as charged sir.

We had a very nice, very comfortable lifestyle and never felt the need to spend more, even as I made more. Our savings rate by the end of my career was remarkable.
When you do the math for just the automobiles alone. They were $822.06 and $784.23 per month with 0.9% interest rates. If I drive them for 5 more years that's a savings of $19,275 per year or $96,377 over 5 years for what will be two ten-year-old vehicles with 100k miles. Keep them ten more years and that's a savings of $192,754 to drive cars with 150k miles. That's really money that can be invested. Plus, I have two reliable vehicles and I don't have to deal with the modern-day crap.
 
When you do the math for just the automobiles alone. They were $822.06 and $784.23 per month with 0.9% interest rates. If I drive them for 5 more years that's a savings of $19,275 per year or $96,377 over 5 years for what will be two ten-year-old vehicles with 100k miles. Keep them ten more years and that's a savings of $192,754 to drive cars with 150k miles. That's really money that can be invested. Plus, I have two reliable vehicles and I don't have to deal with the modern-day crap.
Speaking of automobiles: I calculate our family's net worth on January 1 every year. Have done so every year for decades. I try to be as accurate as possible. I've gotten quite good at it and I'm generally done before noon.

One of the things I learned from doing that was how painful it was to depreciate our cars, especially if they were almost new. But if you keep them a long time the annual depreciation drops off dramatically. Everyone knows that vehicles depreciate but to see what it was doing to our net worth was eye opening.

So calculating our annual net worth taught me to keep our cars almost forever.
 
...

When I bought my first house it was 4X my salary….. now it’s 9 or 10X a person’s salary.
A person making $70,000 here in Florida trying to buy a $700K house is very common.
If this is true and common it shows how irresponsible they are. They should be buying a $200 to $300 house.
Thing is, they cant buy a 700k home there, makes no sense.
 
Speaking of automobiles: I calculate our family's net worth on January 1 every year. Have done so every year for decades. I try to be as accurate as possible. I've gotten quite good at it and I'm generally done before noon.

One of the things I learned from doing that was how painful it was to depreciate our cars, especially if they were almost new. But if you keep them a long time the annual depreciation drops off dramatically. Everyone knows that vehicles depreciate but to see what it was doing to our net worth was eye opening.

So calculating our annual net worth taught me to keep our cars almost forever.
Not to mention taxes. The taxes on those vehicles when they were new was close to $1,000 each. Last year, it was about $110 each.
 
Not to mention taxes. The taxes on those vehicles when they were new was close to $1,000 each. Last year, it was about $110 each.
Good point however when talking taxes, I don’t think everybody knows that in some states you pay property tax on the vehicles that you own, then, even in those states that collect taxes on your personal vehicles, the tax rate varies widely.

In the state of South Carolina, I paid about 10 times the tax rate on my vehicles boat and motorcycle then I pay here in North Carolina
But even then, the tax rate varies, not by state, but the counties within that state
 
The DOW and S&P set another high today. Easy money, as they say...
1728946033938.webp
 
Which candidate will be favorable for the markets in 2025 ?

Please NO politics….
Lol, Dave. Asking that question with the "no politics" caveat takes skill I only wish I had!

IMO, being usually wrong and not pretending to know economics, it doesn't matter for 2025. Kind of like trying to steer a container ship, where you are and where you are headed depends on decisions made long ago.

I've been wrong every time I've tried to time the marker in the past. Not going to try it again. I'll hold an emergency fund and 3 years worth of spending in cash or equivalent and keep the rest invested.
 
Let’s keep it rolling to new daily highs.
The markets are very high. Can they go higher? Well, yes they can.

Today's PE ratio for the S&P 500 is 30.4. The median long term PE ratio of the S&P 500 is 17.9.

Is this a buying opportunity? Is this a shorting opportunity?

There is an old saying (that would apply quite well to someone planning to short the S&P 500). "The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent."

As for myself I'm staying mostly invested but slowly cutting back. I know it's impossible to time the markets.
 
When you do the math for just the automobiles alone. They were $822.06 and $784.23 per month with 0.9% interest rates. If I drive them for 5 more years that's a savings of $19,275 per year or $96,377 over 5 years for what will be two ten-year-old vehicles with 100k miles. Keep them ten more years and that's a savings of $192,754 to drive cars with 150k miles.
That's some crazy money going out. I still have a 2005 truck and a 2015 car I bought both new and paid off long ago - both low miles and well self maintained, so tons of life remains. Probably keep them at least 10 or more years ... have zero desire to buy something new or different. By not trading in and buying new vehicles every 2-3 years, I've probably saved a ton of money which I've invested and used for other necessary things. My neighbor never buys and does a lease that's not cheap ... always want's a new car, so he's just flushing money because he can't even get anything back if traded in or sold.
 
Folks around here seem to trust the red side a bit more with the economy.
It is hard to say who would actually be better. On policy and not getting into a food fight, Both are pretty irresponsible on spending and debt but that has not derailed the train yet. Maybe it is starting to do so. Republicans would be better on not upsetting energy production so soon, Democrats would likely be better on trade, markets will continue to do well because we must continue to have relatively low rates so money will continue to look for somewhere it can make real returns. This advice is worth what you paid for it!
 
I think both will continue the print-and-spend policy. They simply have no other choice.
Absolutely and the public has no desire to fix the debt. They do act according to the desires of the voters. So spend both sides will.
As far as the market. I think the first breather will be after the election. But I dont time markets either. Except we know the Feds and everyone else will take a steady hand until after the election is done. I will be leary once it is over and right through the 1quarter of the new year. But I know nothing other than seats of the pants go with the flow until I do not. I learned a long time ago not to fight the market.
 
That's some crazy money going out. I still have a 2005 truck and a 2015 car I bought both new and paid off long ago - both low miles and well self maintained, so tons of life remains. Probably keep them at least 10 or more years ... have zero desire to buy something new or different. By not trading in and buying new vehicles every 2-3 years, I've probably saved a ton of money which I've invested and used for other necessary things. My neighbor never buys and does a lease that's not cheap ... always want's a new car, so he's just flushing money because he can't even get anything back if traded in or sold.
Nice strategy. My strategy is very similar.

I just bought a 2008 Toyota Corolla CE a few months ago from original owners (an elderly couple that are getting too old to drive) for $4,000. It only had 60k miles on it, and it had oil changes every 3k miles.

I'm currently using it as a commuter car, and plan to put 20k+ miles a year on it.
Some original owners of this generation Toyota Corolla (years: 2003 to 2008), have said on Reddit that they ran into the dredded 299,999 mile odometer stuck issue. But they also mentioned that in 300,000 miles, their car has only needed basic maintenance and a few repairs like starter, alternator (for example). Those owners also commented at how reliable their Toyota was from 200k to 300k miles. They never hesitate to take it on long trips. I think most other car companies cars would need a lot of expensive repairs from 200k to 300k miles, but not Toyotas.

Some other pluses about the car:
The engine has a timing chain.
Toyota timing chains never have to be replaced (so no timing belt or chain replacements to ever worry about).
Also, vehicle gets 40 MPG on the highway if driven with a light foot at the speed limit in warm weather.
Also, 2008 was the last year for the Toyota Corolla where Toyota specs 5W-30 in the owners manual.
So I can use 5W-30 and be following the owner's manual recommendation.

So with this $4,000 purchase I plan to drive the car from the 60k miles it had when I bought it used for another 240,000 miles until it reaches 300k miles.

I don't see any advantage to buying a new vehicle for $35,000 and driving it for 240,000 miles when you can buy a used vehicle for $4,000 and drive it an additional 240,000 miles. Also so many newer vehicles with the low tension piston rings burn a quart of oil every 1,000 miles. I didn't want to have to deal with that. All the vehicles I own have the normal tension piston rings and don't use burn or leak any oil.
 
Last edited:
I think both will continue the print-and-spend policy. They simply have no other choice.
Every politician always focuses on today, while heaping trillions of new debt onto the next generation.
Sooner or later the interest on the debt will exceed tax revenues, at which point it would become serious.
I blame President Nixon in 1970 for taking the US off of the gold standard. It enabled money printing with nothing to back up the new dollars printed.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom