How does a MAGA define winning?

[BCCHoosier]

Your post is so silly on many levels.

Most Americans' holdings in equities are in qualified accounts, not non-qualified accounts. Only about 10% of Americans file a schedule D, which details transactions in NQ accounts, and that is the account a person would trade to raise cash for taxes as you say. Rarely does anyone sell to pay taxes. Over my 26 years as an advisor, I can only think of one.

As for chaos, most Americans who invest do it via a 401k, 403b, 457, etc and are dollar cost averaging. Therefore, on a monthly basis, they are buying at lower levels. Wonderful deal for them.

As for RMD's, you're clueless. First, most retirees are not 100% in equities. They have a blend of equities and fixed income. Considering the RMD amount us roughly 4-5%/yr, many can easily use the fixed income portion to cover the RMD. Or, many can do in-kind distributions, so no selling needed.

No problem for me to plan for my clients.

But 2022 was hard as Biden's policies in 2021 WRT energy, ARP, free rent, etc added to inflation, per the SF Fed. So, in 2022, SP500 down 18%, AGG down 13% (worst ever), and Nasdaq down 33%. To do RMD's in Biden's 2022 economy was brutal.

Good post. I hate the change they made on inherited retirement accounts from nonspouses. I'm paying taxes on money I don't need but have to have that account to zero by year 10 of date of death. Withhold 24 percent each year...

Any advice? Can't find a work around. First world problem, but inheriting money from a parents retirement account during my peak earning years has not been fun.

My dad died the year they changed the law.

 

[Cortez88]

Good post. I hate the change they made on inherited retirement accounts from nonspouses. I'm paying taxes on money I don't need but have to have that account to zero by year 10 of date of death. Withhold 24 percent each year...

Any advice? Can't find a work around. First world problem, but inheriting money from a parents retirement account during my peak earning years has not been fun.

My dad died the year they changed the law.

Good to know I’ll never have that issue. When someone dies in my family you just hope you don’t get stuck paying for the casket.

 

[bailey777]

Well what do you know orange man horrible over 50%.

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll​

Friday, April 18, 2025

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 51% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. Forty-seven percent (47%) disapprove.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Well what do you know orange man horrible over 50%.

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll​

Friday, April 18, 2025

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 51% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. Forty-seven percent (47%) disapprove.

Selective reading of the polls. The President's approval peaked a couple months ago at a level that was the lowest for any President other than Trump during his first term. It's falling now, especially among independents and Republicans aren't going to win elections without the independent vote.

MSN

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179-test-v2.html

President Donald Trump Job Approval Ratings and Polls | RealClearPolling

Track President Trump's job approval with RealClearPolling. Gain valuable insights and stay informed on the latest ratings and political developments for a comprehensive view of the political landscape.

www.realclearpolling.com

 

[ribbont]

Good post. I hate the change they made on inherited retirement accounts from nonspouses. I'm paying taxes on money I don't need but have to have that account to zero by year 10 of date of death. Withhold 24 percent each year...

Any advice? Can't find a work around. First world problem, but inheriting money from a parents retirement account during my peak earning years has not been fun.

My dad died the year they changed the law.

There may be some options, but probably be best to meet with an advisor to get a better understanding of your whole financial picture and create a plan.

 

[ribbont]

Price spikes from supply-chain disruptions are not true inflation. And this is evidenced by the fact that prices revert quickly as the supply disruption is resolved.

Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.

Inflation was high around the world because central banks everywhere did the same thing ours did.

No offense, but I think I am going to believe the writings of 2 people who have PhD's in Economics and have written dozens of white papers regarding Economics over a poster on a forum, as much as I appreciate your posts.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

No offense, but I think I am going to believe the writings of 2 people who have PhD's in Economics and have written dozens of white papers regarding Economics over a poster on a forum, as much as I appreciate your posts.

What I'm saying isn't even a matter of dispute among economists. The "always and everywhere" quote I referenced is from one side of the economics spectrum (Milton Friedman). And, from the other side of it, Paul Krugman has written before explaining the difference between inflation and "prices getting higher." If I was so inclined, I'd try to go find it. He was right.

When a major oil refinery catches fire and we see a spike in prices at the pump, is that inflation? It will contribute to an uptick in the CPI, of course. And we'll all be paying more to fill up our tanks. But the supply of gasoline will be restored soon enough and, unsurprisingly, prices will find their way closer to where they were before the supply disruption.

Inflation is about the relationship between dollars and the goods they chase. Obviously, if there's a decline in supplies of "the goods they chase", it will have an inflationary effect. But these are almost always ephemeral or, ahem, "transitory" -- as opposed to the changes in money supply, which are far stickier.

 

[BradStevens]

Good post. I hate the change they made on inherited retirement accounts from nonspouses. I'm paying taxes on money I don't need but have to have that account to zero by year 10 of date of death. Withhold 24 percent each year...

Any advice? Can't find a work around. First world problem, but inheriting money from a parents retirement account during my peak earning years has not been fun.

My dad died the year they changed the law.

Give it all away.

 

[snarlcakes]

Give it all away.

To your family.

 

[BCCHoosier]

To your family.

I am doing all I can to leave it to my kids. I won't need it. Just hate the 24 percent tax hit.

 

[ribbont]

I am doing all I can to leave it to my kids. I won't need it. Just hate the 24 percent tax hit.

Are you over 70 1/2?

 

[BCCHoosier]

Are you over 70 1/2?

52. I will add i did use a CFP for this inherited money. I've always handled my own investing in terms of stock and fund selection.

Saw a lot of death around me in a 5 year span so want my wife to have someone t8 handle money if I pass first. I'll retire in 4-5 years and move everything to him for convenience.

 

[DANC]

I know you don’t let the fact that you don’t read the articles stop you from having irrelevant and asinine responses, but I’ll link it again for you. Look at page 4. It has the heading “What changed from December to April”.

https://www.in.gov/sba/files/1.-Economic-Outlook-April-16,-2025.pdf

You mean this?

• For Indiana, revised data (mostly released in March 2025) from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Bureau of EconomicAnalysis show that job gains and income growth were lower than expected in 2024, especially the second half.– This results in less momentum, lower starting point for forecast.– Wage growth was still unusually strong, just not as robust as earlier indications

How is that Trump's fault?

 

[DANC]

What I'm saying isn't even a matter of dispute among economists. The "always and everywhere" quote I referenced is from one side of the economics spectrum (Milton Friedman). And, from the other side of it, Paul Krugman has written before explaining the difference between inflation and "prices getting higher." If I was so inclined, I'd try to go find it. He was right.

When a major oil refinery catches fire and we see a spike in prices at the pump, is that inflation? It will contribute to an uptick in the CPI, of course. And we'll all be paying more to fill up our tanks. But the supply of gasoline will be restored soon enough and, unsurprisingly, prices will find their way closer to where they were before the supply disruption.

Inflation is about the relationship between dollars and the goods they chase. Obviously, if there's a decline in supplies of "the goods they chase", it will have an inflationary effect. But these are almost always ephemeral or, ahem, "transitory" -- as opposed to the changes in money supply, which are far stickier.

Is that the Paul Krugman who predicted a worldwide Depressoin if Trump was elected in 2016? Or someone with the same name?

 

[IUclover]

Is stating gas is $1.98 and egg prices down by 92% considered winning by MAGAs?

Not reality. Just statements by MAGA POTUS.

 

[ribbont]

What I'm saying isn't even a matter of dispute among economists. The "always and everywhere" quote I referenced is from one side of the economics spectrum (Milton Friedman). And, from the other side of it, Paul Krugman has written before explaining the difference between inflation and "prices getting higher." If I was so inclined, I'd try to go find it. He was right.

When a major oil refinery catches fire and we see a spike in prices at the pump, is that inflation? It will contribute to an uptick in the CPI, of course. And we'll all be paying more to fill up our tanks. But the supply of gasoline will be restored soon enough and, unsurprisingly, prices will find their way closer to where they were before the supply disruption.

Inflation is about the relationship between dollars and the goods they chase. Obviously, if there's a decline in supplies of "the goods they chase", it will have an inflationary effect. But these are almost always ephemeral or, ahem, "transitory" -- as opposed to the changes in money supply, which are far stickier.

Not all agree with Friedman. Have you read any of Nitzan's writings on inflation restructuring theory? It's been many years for me but he debunks (or challenges at least) Friedman's monetary phenomenon statement.

Anyway, I don't want to get into a back and forth. Don't have time to really do it. Yesterday I painted a deck all day and today it's an interior ceiling so I won't be checking in much if at all.

My post was to dispel the idea that US inflation was just like the rest of the world. It wasn't because of the spending decisions made by the Biden administration.

 

[IUCrazy2]

A ponzi scheme is hardly ever up for a vote every 2 years but here we are. Mas - we've accepted as a nation we like and desire entitlement programs (social safety nets) and that what we disagree about it WHO it should beenfit and HOW it's funded.


Covering all Americans might be the only way to save it. Which is another argument entirely but why don't we have it. Medicare polls tremendously** well as do issues related to increased spending on health issues/programs. That's the will of the people. Now, do our politicians have an obligation to lay out the pros/cons of a for profit vs. govt funded healthcare scheme? Yes. Will they? Probably not.

But we should discuss this openly as a nation. It's a moonshot but we should honestly look at it without rose colored glasses (progressives) or laser beams for eyes (conservatives).


** https://www.kff.org/health-costs/po...other-priorities-for-incoming-administration/

We should see how well these things poll when they are fully funded. Digging around, it looks like social security payroll tax would need to be about 16%. You could lower that amount by raising or completely lifting the cap. Medicare would need to be about 1% higher. So overall you are looking at a roughly 5%, non-deductible tax increase for all Americans to fund those programs.

I don't think you can have a rational conversation with people about cost until they are paying the true price for something.

 

[snarlcakes]

We should see how well these things poll when they are fully funded. Digging around, it looks like social security payroll tax would need to be about 16%. You could lower that amount by raising or completely lifting the cap. Medicare would need to be about 1% higher. So overall you are looking at a roughly 5%, non-deductible tax increase for all Americans to fund those programs.

I don't think you can have a rational conversation with people about cost until they are paying the true price for something.

And what it would do to growth. What does the U.S. economy and stock market look like if we're not running annual trillion dollar deficits? At some point public spending starts to crowd private spending and it's not good. Putting aside the merits of DOGE and tariffs, they might only close the deficits by 20% and we'll probably end up on a recession. Now times that 5. What does that shit show look like?

 

[larsIU]

We should see how well these things poll when they are fully funded. Digging around, it looks like social security payroll tax would need to be about 16%. You could lower that amount by raising or completely lifting the cap. Medicare would need to be about 1% higher. So overall you are looking at a roughly 5%, non-deductible tax increase for all Americans to fund those programs.

I don't think you can have a rational conversation with people about cost until they are paying the true price for something.

Agreed. Just want to have an honest debate and make it a/the national issue (as opposed to these stupid ****ing culture wars). Bring to the front page of everyday life and talk honestly about the costs and benefits relative to our current system.

Where’s a Ross Perot esque candidate when you need one? But would anybody have the attention span as an average American to even have the debate at this point? Most importantly will our media allow a debate which possibly leads to consensus building and thereby threatens their current business model of Us vs. Them?

 

[snarlcakes]

Agreed. Just want to have an honest debate and make it a/the national issue (as opposed to these stupid ****ing culture wars). Bring to the front page of everyday life and talk honestly about the costs and benefits relative to our current system.

Where’s a Ross Perot esque candidate when you need one? But would anybody have the attention span as an average American to even have the debate at this point? Most importantly will our media allow a debate which possibly leads to consensus building and thereby threatens their current business model of Us vs. Them?

We have already voted and had the discussion on what we want. The answer is we want to run deficits and overspend.

 

[Cortez88]

Agreed. Just want to have an honest debate and make it a/the national issue (as opposed to these stupid ****ing culture wars). Bring to the front page of everyday life and talk honestly about the costs and benefits relative to our current system.

Where’s a Ross Perot esque candidate when you need one? But would anybody have the attention span as an average American to even have the debate at this point? Most importantly will our media allow a debate which possibly leads to consensus building and thereby threatens their current business model of Us vs. Them?

But if you have culture wars to fight, then everyone gets to ignore the real issues. The real issues are hard.

 

[larsIU]

We have already voted and had the discussion on what we want. The answer is we want to run deficits and overspend.

Duh

 

[sglowrider]

Getting Indians to eat beef:

 

[All4You]

Getting Indians to eat beef:

View embedded media

Did you know that India is the 5th largest beef exporter in the world, and the 4th largest consumer of beef in the world?

 

[sglowrider]

Did you know that India is the 5th largest beef exporter in the world, and the 4th largest consumer of beef in the world?

I am not sure you know the difference between a cow and a water buffalo?

Cows are scared animals in india.

The ruling BJP party is a ultra-nationalist hindu party. people have been killed on the rumours or accusations of someone/Muslim transporting or eating beef.

 

[All4You]

I am not sure you know the difference between a cow and a water buffalo?

Cows are scared animals in india.

The ruling BJP party is a ultra-nationalist hindu party. people have been killed on the rumours or accusations of someone/Muslim transporting or eating beef.

Bruh, duh?

I never insinuated that they eat sacred cows, but they certainly export and eat "Beef" in India, even some sects/castes of Hindus.

I didn't make the silly claim the congressman did, nor did I make the throwaway statement "Getting Indians to eat beef"...

Getting Indians to eat beef:

View embedded media

Now if you had said "Getting Indians to eat the sacred cow" or "Getting Indians to eat American Beef" I would've left it alone. I've eaten Water Buffalo, like it and if it were as affordable as our beef, I would prefer it. That said, it's still beef to me.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

The market is a small percentage of people. Doing nothing about prices or even making them worse will flip the house. I’ve said it before. Economy. Recession. Market. Eh. Nothing hits home to the masses like the grocery store and the gas station. Trump’s doing nothing on prices. Dems couldn’t overcome prices and neither will trump

Markets have an influence on everything downstream.

Thank goodness this was all a part of his brilliant master plan

 

[bailey777]

More winning.

 

[iuwclurker]

Good to know I’ll never have that issue. When someone dies in my family you just hope you don’t get stuck paying for the casket.

I’ve always wondered if the lyric is

“ all he left us was alone”
or
“ all he left us was a loan”?

 

[BradStevens]

But would anybody have the attention span as an average American to even have the debate at this point? Most importantly will our media allow a debate which possibly leads to consensus building and thereby threatens their current business model of Us vs. Them?

You know the answer to all these questions.

 

[iuwclurker]

Give it all away.

Exactly. Decline the inheritance…

 

[iuwclurker]

Agreed. Just want to have an honest debate and make it a/the national issue (as opposed to these stupid ****ing culture wars). Bring to the front page of everyday life and talk honestly about the costs and benefits relative to our current system.

Where’s a Ross Perot esque candidate when you need one? But would anybody have the attention span as an average American to even have the debate at this point? Most importantly will our media allow a debate which possibly leads to consensus building and thereby threatens their current business model of Us vs. Them?

We need a centristy centrist with the don’t give a damn attitude of Trump.

 

[BCCHoosier]

More winning.

View embedded media

Troll

 

[larsIU]

You know the answer to all these questions.

42

 

[snarlcakes]

We need a centristy centrist with the don’t give a damn attitude of Trump.

We already have a centrist, his name is Donald Trump. You're most likely advocating for a neocon who is a leftist on culture issues.

 

[ribbont]

Exactly. Decline the inheritance…

He can't. It's an inherited IRA and he had 9 months to disclaim but that that time has passed.

 

[sweetsilence]

I am not sure you know the difference between a cow and a water buffalo?

Cows are scared animals in india.

The ruling BJP party is a ultra-nationalist hindu party. people have been killed on the rumours or accusations of someone/Muslim transporting or eating beef.

Water Buffalo meat is not considered beef.

 

[sweetsilence]

He can't. It's an inherited IRA and he had 9 months to disclaim but that that time has passed.

What happens to the money if you don't claim it?

My wife is an only child and we will be looking at a significant inheritance in the future.

 

[ribbont]

What happens to the money if you don't claim it?

My wife is an only child and we will be looking at a significant inheritance in the future.

If the money is pre-tax plan, like an IRA, you have 9 months to disclaimer, and I believe the proceeds will go to the contingent beneficiary (since you said only child). If no contingent beneficiary, it will go to the estate and be distributed, after taxes, per the will. And likely your wife is in the will.

After tax assets that are disclaimer will be distributed to contingent beneficiaries, or next of kin, or finally escheated to the state. If any attorneys on the board have any corrections, please share. State laws may vary.

 

[BCCHoosier]

What happens to the money if you don't claim it?

My wife is an only child and we will be looking at a significant inheritance in the future.

You have time now. We did not as my dad died the year the changed the law. More than 9 months have passed.

If your in-laws money is in a tax deferred plan like a 401k, yiu could have them change the beneficiary.