Budgeting 160K for newbs

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
User avatar
mr. wednesday
Posts: 406
Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 1:15 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby mr. wednesday » Mon Oct 14, 2013 8:36 pm

Man, 2.7% property taxes is rough. I think my local rate is around 0.6%. Probably still doesn't make up for income tax though.

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8447
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby thesealocust » Mon Oct 14, 2013 8:57 pm

The USAA credit card I have has outrageously good terms and customer service. Dunno about the rest of their stuff, but I have a crazy low interest rate and have always had generous limits relative to my credit history.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11725
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby kalvano » Mon Oct 14, 2013 9:28 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
kalvano wrote:I had State Farm run a quote on my homeowner's insurance and it was almost double what USAA is charging me. A reasonable expectation for that would likely be over $3000.


I used to love USAA and would recommend all my troops get them but they have changed considerably. their credit products are terrible, auto loans are not competitive unless you have a 750+ CS, I saved nearly a $400 per six months by switching to Geico on car insurance and their Cd rates are low. I haven't tried their home insurance but as a whole I think you can do better than USAA for almost everything else.


I've shopped around and they are either competitive with other products or significantly better than comparable products. Plus, the more you have with them, the more discounts you get. And when I call, I can have a live person on the line within minutes, and their response is "how can I help you?', not "that's not my job." And like I said, homeowner's insurance is dramatically cheaper. Plus, they are quick and efficient.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11725
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby kalvano » Mon Oct 14, 2013 9:35 pm

mr. wednesday wrote:Man, 2.7% property taxes is rough. I think my local rate is around 0.6%. Probably still doesn't make up for income tax though.


My rate is pretty high, and it varies by county, but yeah, property taxes are higher. They go mainly to the public school system, so there is usually a direct correlation between tax rate and school quality, barring a place with disproportionally high income that allows for a lower tax rate and still brings in a ton of money. Highland Park has pretty low property taxes, but almost every house is worth at least $800K, all the way up to $10M - $15M, so they can afford to tax at a lower rate because they get more per house.

Even if you don't have kids, school system is something to consider when buying a house because it's important to a lot of people, so being in a crappy school district will make the house less marketable. Especially important in Dallas, which has an overall terrible school system, but certain schools are great, and the houses that feed those schools tend to cost a good bit more.

User avatar
unc0mm0n1
Posts: 1714
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 1:06 pm

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby unc0mm0n1 » Mon Oct 14, 2013 10:20 pm

thesealocust wrote:The USAA credit card I have has outrageously good terms and customer service. Dunno about the rest of their stuff, but I have a crazy low interest rate and have always had generous limits relative to my credit history.


I don't carry balances so interests rate don't really impress me. Their rewards structure is terrible in comparison to just about any other major card (Discover, Chase etc.). Also they don't do automatic credit increases you have to take a hard pull to your credit report to get a CLI (which is normally very low). I didn't have much success with the Big limits like you. When I joined the army after college they started me off with a 1000 dollars limit 5 years later and 2 hard pulls my limit was 2000. Same time frame Chase gave me a 10K visa signature and NFCU gave me a 25 visa signature. YMMV, but I can think of much better CCs especially if you're putting major spend on your cards (which many young associates are).

Anonymous User
Posts: 273376
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Oct 14, 2013 10:57 pm

Making market in nyc with no debt. What % of my earning should I be saving?

User avatar
brotherdarkness
Posts: 3254
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 8:11 pm

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby brotherdarkness » Mon Oct 14, 2013 11:00 pm

.
Last edited by brotherdarkness on Fri Jun 27, 2014 1:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

run26.2
Posts: 897
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:35 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby run26.2 » Mon Oct 14, 2013 11:23 pm

2ndtime wrote:I disagree. Yes, you are taxed on the money when you withdraw it, and if you have enough money saved, you will be taxed at the same rate when you withdraw it. HOWEVER, the money grows tax-free, and at the usual estimate of 7% earned per year, your money is expected to double every 10 years. So, $1000 he puts in now, at say, age 30, will be worth 8 times as much at age 60, or $8000. If he invested it outside of a 401k, he would start with $720, and thus would end up with $5760.

This analysis is incomplete. You haven't calculated tax on the $8000. Assuming the same tax rate at the time of withdrawal as the original $1000 (i.e., 28%), this person would have the exact same amount, $5760, if he or she invested in the tax-deferred retirement account. The moral of the story is that it doesn't matter when you pay the tax if the rates are the same.

2ndtime wrote:Of course, he would be taxed on his earning every year, so in fact, he would likely earn about 5%, so his money would take about 14 years to double, earning him about $2,880 by age 60. This is only 36% of what he would have had.

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here, but if you mean that the person is taxed on his or her gains annually, that is not the case. You pay tax when you sell your securities.

2ndtime
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 2:24 pm

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby 2ndtime » Tue Oct 15, 2013 2:37 am

run26.2 wrote:
2ndtime wrote:I disagree. Yes, you are taxed on the money when you withdraw it, and if you have enough money saved, you will be taxed at the same rate when you withdraw it. HOWEVER, the money grows tax-free, and at the usual estimate of 7% earned per year, your money is expected to double every 10 years. So, $1000 he puts in now, at say, age 30, will be worth 8 times as much at age 60, or $8000. If he invested it outside of a 401k, he would start with $720, and thus would end up with $5760.

This analysis is incomplete. You haven't calculated tax on the $8000. Assuming the same tax rate at the time of withdrawal as the original $1000 (i.e., 28%), this person would have the exact same amount, $5760, if he or she invested in the tax-deferred retirement account. The moral of the story is that it doesn't matter when you pay the tax if the rates are the same.

2ndtime wrote:Of course, he would be taxed on his earning every year, so in fact, he would likely earn about 5%, so his money would take about 14 years to double, earning him about $2,880 by age 60. This is only 36% of what he would have had.

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here, but if you mean that the person is taxed on his or her gains annually, that is not the case. You pay tax when you sell your securities.



Upon withdrawal in retirement, the tax rate would likely be lower, since the money that was put in was taxed at the marginal rate, whereas money withdrawn will likely be the bulk of one's income, and thus taxed at the effective rate.
Also, if OP makes partner, and his income rises, so will his marginal tax rate, up to 39%. He would likely be paying much less than this rate when he withdraws the money, most likely around a 28% marginal rate, and a lower effective rate.

As to your second point, yes, capital gains are taxed when the securities are sold, but any capital gains realized by the fund managers buying and selling the component stocks within a mutual fund are taxed on a yearly basis. Plus, dividends earned are declared quarterly. True, if one has invested in an index fund, there will be very little capital gains earned in a year, but there will be dividend earnings. Perhaps my figure of 2% was high for an index fund, but there will still be taxes that have to be paid annually. Most people will pay that out of income,and not by selling shares in a fund, but the taxes are still eating into income, which would be growing tax free in the 401k.


In response to those who felt that a 50-100k emergency fund is too high:

I agree, it's probably too high for OP. I was thinking of my expenses, not his. Nonetheless, I would not use a 401k as my emergency fund if I could avoid doing so. The point of the emergency fund is to avoid withdrawing from a stock fund when the market is down, although one could reasonably argue that one is likely to be ahead in the long run by taking a chance on the market for at least some of the emergency fund. Do recall, however, that the market was down by more than 50% just a few years ago. Withdrawing from a 401k then would have resulted in a 60% loss plus a 10% penalty. And there was a huge market drop in 2000 as well. And if a budget deal isn't reached this week, we will see another huge drop. Anyone needing cash from an investment account during those periods will be sorry they didn't have cash.

Another reason for cash is for other emergencies. An accident resulting in disability, uncovered medical expenses and deductables, nursing home / rehab expenses, either short or long term, and legal expenses. ( e.g. a friend just spent 75K for criminal defense expenses for a family member ).

As far as buying a house is concerned, I agree that it's more a lifestyle choice than an ideal investment. When all the costs of home ownership and lost opportunity costs are balanced vs the leveraged investment potential, it usually comes out a wash in the studies I've seen. Still, my house has turned out to be a very good investment long term. It's also a form of forced savings. However, when considering a house, keep in mind not just the real estate taxes and the mortgage interest expense, but also the utilities and insurance costs. The utilities really surprised me. I'm in Northern California, and have a modest sized house and yard, and a well insulated recently remodeled house. My utilities (gas, electricity, water, garbage collection ) cost about $900 a month, and that's in addition to a gardener and house cleaning twice a month, plus taxes and insurance.
So, if one does decide to buy a house, be prepared for all the ancillary expenses.

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15503
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby Tiago Splitter » Tue Oct 15, 2013 9:04 am

2ndtime wrote:In response to those who felt that a 50-100k emergency fund is too high:

I agree, it's probably too high for OP. I was thinking of my expenses, not his. Nonetheless, I would not use a 401k as my emergency fund if I could avoid doing so. The point of the emergency fund is to avoid withdrawing from a stock fund when the market is down, although one could reasonably argue that one is likely to be ahead in the long run by taking a chance on the market for at least some of the emergency fund. Do recall, however, that the market was down by more than 50% just a few years ago. Withdrawing from a 401k then would have resulted in a 60% loss plus a 10% penalty. And there was a huge market drop in 2000 as well. And if a budget deal isn't reached this week, we will see another huge drop. Anyone needing cash from an investment account during those periods will be sorry they didn't have cash.

No one is talking about using a 401k as the only emergency fund because you may not have access to the funds while still working. We're talking about putting $5,500 of your emergency savings into a Roth IRA. There is no requirement that one invest this money. But if an emergency doesn't come up you've now got investable money in the Roth that can grow tax free. And if an emergency does arise there is no tax or penalty. Roughly four months after starting you could have this up to $11,000, plenty of money to deal with any life event. This also doesn't preclude putting additional money into a taxable account as you suggest.

It's also a little disingenuous to suggest that someone using a 401k as an emergency fund in 2008 would have lost 60%. There is no more a requirement that one invest their 401k money into risk-bearing assets as there is a requirement that someone invest their savings account in risk-bearing assets.

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby guano » Tue Oct 15, 2013 9:26 am

Anonymous User wrote:
kalvano wrote:I had State Farm run a quote on my homeowner's insurance and it was almost double what USAA is charging me. A reasonable expectation for that would likely be over $3000.


I used to love USAA and would recommend all my troops get them but they have changed considerably. their credit products are terrible, auto loans are not competitive unless you have a 750+ CS, I saved nearly a $400 per six months by switching to Geico on car insurance and their Cd rates are low. I haven't tried their home insurance but as a whole I think you can do better than USAA for almost everything else.

For car insurance, you should look into switching every two years - or call your provider and ask to be priced as a new applicant (some companies will do this)

For several reasons (mainly marketing) first year rates are significantly lower than for older policies

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby guano » Tue Oct 15, 2013 9:28 am

Anonymous User wrote:Making market in nyc with no debt. What % of my earning should I be saving?

75%

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby guano » Tue Oct 15, 2013 9:36 am

2ndtime wrote:
run26.2 wrote:
2ndtime wrote:I disagree. Yes, you are taxed on the money when you withdraw it, and if you have enough money saved, you will be taxed at the same rate when you withdraw it. HOWEVER, the money grows tax-free, and at the usual estimate of 7% earned per year, your money is expected to double every 10 years. So, $1000 he puts in now, at say, age 30, will be worth 8 times as much at age 60, or $8000. If he invested it outside of a 401k, he would start with $720, and thus would end up with $5760.

This analysis is incomplete. You haven't calculated tax on the $8000. Assuming the same tax rate at the time of withdrawal as the original $1000 (i.e., 28%), this person would have the exact same amount, $5760, if he or she invested in the tax-deferred retirement account. The moral of the story is that it doesn't matter when you pay the tax if the rates are the same.

2ndtime wrote:Of course, he would be taxed on his earning every year, so in fact, he would likely earn about 5%, so his money would take about 14 years to double, earning him about $2,880 by age 60. This is only 36% of what he would have had.

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here, but if you mean that the person is taxed on his or her gains annually, that is not the case. You pay tax when you sell your securities.



Upon withdrawal in retirement, the tax rate would likely be lower, since the money that was put in was taxed at the marginal rate, whereas money withdrawn will likely be the bulk of one's income, and thus taxed at the effective rate.
Also, if OP makes partner, and his income rises, so will his marginal tax rate, up to 39%. He would likely be paying much less than this rate when he withdraws the money, most likely around a 28% marginal rate, and a lower effective rate.

This again.

That's the logic people would assume. But, it turned out that for a sizeable portion of the population it didn't hold true. Just imagine someone who, at the start of his/ her career, was in a low tax bracket, but still maxed out contributions. Late career this person was making bank, and developed other sources of income, such as silent partner in a business, or an investment portfolio with significant dividends. The unearned income is now significantly more than when said person was starting out, resulting in a higher tax bracket.

The Roth was developed specifically for this purpose. There are plenty of retired people with six figure incomes.

2ndtime
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 2:24 pm

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby 2ndtime » Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:01 am

Tiago Splitter wrote:No one is talking about using a 401k as the only emergency fund because you may not have access to the funds while still working. We're talking about putting $5,500 of your emergency savings into a Roth IRA.


Tiago Splitter wrote:It's also a little disingenuous to suggest that someone using a 401k as an emergency fund in 2008 would have lost 60%. There is no more a requirement that one invest their 401k money into risk-bearing assets as there is a requirement that someone invest their savings account in risk-bearing assets.



I agree that if one doesn't have enough money to fund an emergency fund and a 401k and a Roth, that initially keeping the contributions to the tax advantaged accounts in cash is a good idea. I hadn't thought of that strategy, and it's a good way to start.

However, if you want to benefit the most from investing, it's essential have your money compound at a higher interest rate for the longest possible time, and the way to do that is to invest in the stock market, ideally index funds. The sooner you start, the more money you are likely to have. In fact, federal law now requires company 401k plans to have balanced or target date funds as the default investments, because so many employees end up keeping their money in cash until they retire. I suppose a year or two won't make too much of a difference, but again, if he can afford to fund them all, as soon as he has enough of an emergency fund saved up, the 401k money, followed by the Roth, should be invested in index funds.

Also, raiding retirement accounts should only be done in a dire emergency. I wouldn't recommend getting into the habit of using the 401k or Roth as a savings account or piggy bank. So, once you are on your feet financially, the Roth money should be invested and the your emergency fund should be in a regular account, thus reserving the tax advantaged accounts for long term equity investments.

Other uses for cash: saving for a new car ( maybe not the car he needs now, but the next car, in 5 or 10 years ), for an engagement ring and a wedding (if you are so inclined ).

In any case, I can't get too worked up over the details. I think everyone agrees on the broad outlines: Spend less than you earn. Invest your savings, starting with tax-advantaged accounts. Have an emergency fund.

And as I believe I suggested earlier, everybody should have a long-term disability policy that will pay you 50 to 60% of your salary until you turn 65. This should be your own policy, not through work, so you can keep it when you change jobs. Once you develop a medical problem, your rates will be higher or you won't be able to get insurance at all. Make sure you raise the coverage as your salary increases. Make sure that the policy is specific for your job (i.e. as attorney ). Actually, as an attorney the policy is going to be less expensive than it would be for someone who needs fine motor use of their hands. Nonetheless, the policies are expensive, but essential for long term financial security.

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby guano » Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:04 am

2ndtime wrote:
Tiago Splitter wrote:No one is talking about using a 401k as the only emergency fund because you may not have access to the funds while still working. We're talking about putting $5,500 of your emergency savings into a Roth IRA.


Tiago Splitter wrote:It's also a little disingenuous to suggest that someone using a 401k as an emergency fund in 2008 would have lost 60%. There is no more a requirement that one invest their 401k money into risk-bearing assets as there is a requirement that someone invest their savings account in risk-bearing assets.



I agree that if one doesn't have enough money to fund an emergency fund and a 401k and a Roth, that initially keeping the contributions to the tax advantaged accounts in cash is a good idea. I hadn't thought of that strategy, and it's a good way to start.

However, if you want to benefit the most from investing, it's essential have your money compound at a higher interest rate for the longest possible time, and the way to do that is to invest in the stock market, ideally index funds. The sooner you start, the more money you are likely to have. In fact, federal law now requires company 401k plans to have balanced or target date funds as the default investments, because so many employees end up keeping their money in cash until they retire. I suppose a year or two won't make too much of a difference, but again, if he can afford to fund them all, as soon as he has enough of an emergency fund saved up, the 401k money, followed by the Roth, should be invested in index funds.

Also, raiding retirement accounts should only be done in a dire emergency. I wouldn't recommend getting into the habit of using the 401k or Roth as a savings account or piggy bank. So, once you are on your feet financially, the Roth money should be invested and the your emergency fund should be in a regular account, thus reserving the tax advantaged accounts for long term equity investments.

Other uses for cash: saving for a new car ( maybe not the car he needs now, but the next car, in 5 or 10 years ), for an engagement ring and a wedding (if you are so inclined ).

In any case, I can't get too worked up over the details. I think everyone agrees on the broad outlines: Spend less than you earn. Invest your savings, starting with tax-advantaged accounts. Have an emergency fund.

And as I believe I suggested earlier, everybody should have a long-term disability policy that will pay you 50 to 60% of your salary until you turn 65. This should be your own policy, not through work, so you can keep it when you change jobs. Once you develop a medical problem, your rates will be higher or you won't be able to get insurance at all. Make sure you raise the coverage as your salary increases. Make sure that the policy is specific for your job (i.e. as attorney ). Actually, as an attorney the policy is going to be less expensive than it would be for someone who needs fine motor use of their hands. Nonetheless, the policies are expensive, but essential for long term financial security.

What's your point?

2ndtime
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 2:24 pm

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby 2ndtime » Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:30 am

guano wrote:That's the logic people would assume. But, it turned out that for a sizeable portion of the population it didn't hold true. Just imagine someone who, at the start of his/ her career, was in a low tax bracket, but still maxed out contributions. Late career this person was making bank, and developed other sources of income, such as silent partner in a business, or an investment portfolio with significant dividends. The unearned income is now significantly more than when said person was starting out, resulting in a higher tax bracket.The Roth was developed specifically for this purpose. There are plenty of retired people with six figure incomes.


Absolutely true. Some people won't benefit. But most people will still benefit from the 401k, even people with six figure incomes.


guano wrote:What's your point?


Advice to OP, per his request.

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby guano » Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:36 am

2ndtime wrote:
guano wrote:That's the logic people would assume. But, it turned out that for a sizeable portion of the population it didn't hold true. Just imagine someone who, at the start of his/ her career, was in a low tax bracket, but still maxed out contributions. Late career this person was making bank, and developed other sources of income, such as silent partner in a business, or an investment portfolio with significant dividends. The unearned income is now significantly more than when said person was starting out, resulting in a higher tax bracket.The Roth was developed specifically for this purpose. There are plenty of retired people with six figure incomes.


Absolutely true. Some people won't benefit. But most people will still benefit from the 401k, even people with six figure incomes.


guano wrote:What's your point?


Advice to OP, per his request.

You've managed to spectacularly miss what I says on both.
The first was to say that plenty of people benefit from Roth over traditional (note that I personally prefer traditional; it requires real analysis to determine which is best).
The second was to say "duh!" (Can someone post the gif for me?)

Thanks captain obvious

User avatar
snowpeach06
Posts: 2426
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:32 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby snowpeach06 » Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:49 am

My dad is a financial adviser. Granted, I am making significantly less than you, but what he has told me to do is:
1. By saving about 10% a month, build up a savings of 6 months of living
2. He is contributing to an IRA he started for me, since my job does not have a retirement plan
3. Once I've done both of those things, I am putting my 10% a month into investments. He has me on a conservative plan with mutual funds - because apparently you can't really get stocks with a portfolio of less than 50k.

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby guano » Tue Oct 15, 2013 11:02 am

snowpeach06 wrote:My dad is a financial adviser. Granted, I am making significantly less than you, but what he has told me to do is:
1. By saving about 10% a month, build up a savings of 6 months of living
2. He is contributing to an IRA he started for me, since my job does not have a retirement plan
3. Once I've done both of those things, I am putting my 10% a month into investments. He has me on a conservative plan with mutual funds - because apparently you can't really get stocks with a portfolio of less than 50k.

10%? That's old school advice , and much too low. Personally I recommend 25%, though I understand that can be a bit steep for many people. Do as much as you can. Whether 6 months is reasonable or insufficient depends on the job / employment market, but I won't disagree with that.

A lot of traditional financial planning advice is insufficient ITE (and in some cases actually wrong). Also, believe it or not, success as a financial advisor has very little to do with the quality of the advice given, and there are some very successful financial advisors who don't know shit (beyond the basics)

User avatar
snowpeach06
Posts: 2426
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:32 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby snowpeach06 » Tue Oct 15, 2013 11:14 am

guano wrote:
snowpeach06 wrote:My dad is a financial adviser. Granted, I am making significantly less than you, but what he has told me to do is:
1. By saving about 10% a month, build up a savings of 6 months of living
2. He is contributing to an IRA he started for me, since my job does not have a retirement plan
3. Once I've done both of those things, I am putting my 10% a month into investments. He has me on a conservative plan with mutual funds - because apparently you can't really get stocks with a portfolio of less than 50k.

10%? That's old school advice , and much too low. Personally I recommend 25%, though I understand that can be a bit steep for many people. Do as much as you can. Whether 6 months is reasonable or insufficient depends on the job / employment market, but I won't disagree with that.

A lot of traditional financial planning advice is insufficient ITE (and in some cases actually wrong). Also, believe it or not, success as a financial advisor has very little to do with the quality of the advice given, and there are some very successful financial advisors who don't know shit (beyond the basics)

Like I said, I'm making significantly less than you folks and I'm living in a pretty expensive area. If I invested more than 10%, I wouldn't be able to eat/pay rent. I'm sure he would give different advice to someone making 4x what I'm making. My dad also happens to be a really great financial adviser, and he knows the market like the back of his hand.

2ndtime
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 2:24 pm

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby 2ndtime » Tue Oct 15, 2013 11:25 am

guano wrote:Thanks captain obvious



It's supposed to be obvious. The OP described himself as a "newb".

User avatar
snowpeach06
Posts: 2426
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:32 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby snowpeach06 » Tue Oct 15, 2013 11:28 am

Actually, what do you guys suggest for a credit card? Right now I have a Cash Rewards card with no fees. However, I like to travel. Would I be better served by a miles card? Do you get a decent amount of miles?

User avatar
unc0mm0n1
Posts: 1714
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 1:06 pm

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby unc0mm0n1 » Tue Oct 15, 2013 11:36 am

guano wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
kalvano wrote:I had State Farm run a quote on my homeowner's insurance and it was almost double what USAA is charging me. A reasonable expectation for that would likely be over $3000.


I used to love USAA and would recommend all my troops get them but they have changed considerably. their credit products are terrible, auto loans are not competitive unless you have a 750+ CS, I saved nearly a $400 per six months by switching to Geico on car insurance and their Cd rates are low. I haven't tried their home insurance but as a whole I think you can do better than USAA for almost everything else.

For car insurance, you should look into switching every two years - or call your provider and ask to be priced as a new applicant (some companies will do this)

For several reasons (mainly marketing) first year rates are significantly lower than for older policies


Thanks, I didn't know this.

User avatar
unc0mm0n1
Posts: 1714
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 1:06 pm

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby unc0mm0n1 » Tue Oct 15, 2013 11:49 am

snowpeach06 wrote:Actually, what do you guys suggest for a credit card? Right now I have a Cash Rewards card with no fees. However, I like to travel. Would I be better served by a miles card? Do you get a decent amount of miles?


Well this depends on how much effort you're willing to put into getting miles. I'm a miles churner so I use a wide variety of cards to get free/reduced travel. But it does take a bit of planning and footwork. Me and Mrs. unc0mm0n are doing a month long post bar trip. We're going to Japan, China, South Korea, HK, Taiwan, Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia and Australia. All the flights are business/First class except for HK to Taiwan (we are actually paying for that one out of pocket) and all are paid for with miles that we've earned over the last year. We also got 18 hotel nights free including two at the Park Hyatt Tokyo and two at the Park Hyatt Sydney which both go for over $700/nt.

User avatar
snowpeach06
Posts: 2426
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:32 am

Re: Budgeting 160K for newbs

Postby snowpeach06 » Tue Oct 15, 2013 11:52 am

unc0mm0n1 wrote:
snowpeach06 wrote:Actually, what do you guys suggest for a credit card? Right now I have a Cash Rewards card with no fees. However, I like to travel. Would I be better served by a miles card? Do you get a decent amount of miles?


Well this depends on how much effort you're willing to put into getting miles. I'm a miles churner so I use a wide variety of cards to get free/reduced travel. But it does take a bit of planning and footwork. Me and Mrs. unc0mm0n are doing a month long post bar trip. We're going to Japan, China, South Korea, HK, Taiwan, Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia and Australia. All the flights are business/First class except for HK to Taiwan (we are actually paying for that one out of pocket) and all are paid for with miles that we've earned over the last year. We also got 18 hotel nights free including two at the Park Hyatt Tokyo and two at the Park Hyatt Sydney which both go for over $700/nt.

Do you mind if I ask you how much money you put on your credit card last year? I don't know that I'd be able to put on all much, but, I am willing to put most things on my credit card and do legwork. Also... sounds like an amazing trip!!!




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.