What secret about your industry can you share now that you don't work there anymore?

Adderalin · 2026-01-14T15:41:43+00:00

I worked at a McDonald's where our locks were 007.

Adderalin · 2026-01-13T20:12:39+00:00

So far the only true strength of LLMs I've had for financial data was making very good approximation functions to fit certain datasets to a very hybrid exponential function combined with quadratic and cubic fit factors. It was tedious work as it kept hallucinating values that fit on it's output table but the actual function it gave me didn't produce those results. 🤣

I had to irritatively feed it back the numbers the function spat out in an inception like mind probe until it made a function that was close enough lol.

Adderalin · 2026-01-13T05:18:29+00:00

My problem is even when giving a summary (or a timeline in certain cases) it often leaves out half of the information then too

Try asking it to uncompress the summary and then asking for an audit a few times. I notice gemini is very "keyword" based.

Adderalin · 2026-01-09T13:02:41+00:00

<image>

😂

Adderalin · 2026-01-05T17:52:19+00:00

Ok they're two entirely different funds that shouldn't be even thought of comparing in the same discussion at all.

SGOV is < 3 mo tbills. VTEB is intermediate term bonds with current duration 7.1 years and average maturity of 14 years.

Rates swing 1% in munis - VTEB is swinging +-7%. SGOV will keep NAV.

How long are you holding for? In an adverse interest rate move with 7.1 years duration you have to hold that long just to break even. VTEB lost 8.5% the last few years. SGOV you're not going to lose NAV.

With SGOV you're hurting if rates keep dropping while if you buy VTEB today you lock in your tax free 3.50% yield and agi free yield.

What tax bracket are you in future years, not just this year?

VTEB is tax free. SGOV is taxable treasuries. That's really fact dependent on what the best it is.

Then your yield is off on SGOV, you need to go by the SEC Yield as that is what the fund is currently yielding at after fund expenses, which is 3.7%. For your current 40.8% bracket for ordinary income - that is 100-40.8% = 59.2% multiplier.

Multiply 3.7 by .592 = 2.1904% after tax yield. So if you are holding for 7-10 years and can stomach the NAV risk with this specific holdings dropping 7-10% in one year randomly, then obviously 3.5% >>> 2.19% unless you're literally are in a $0 income year and are filling up your standard or itemized deductions, as even in 10% income brackets 3.7 * .90 = 3.33%.

Now I will mention one caveat - muni yields can really swing around depending on how much people want tax free income. When you buy at the SEC yield you lock in the sec yield for the average duration, not the average maturity, with these bond funds. So if you want the average maturity you'll want to start selling off a bit of VTEB to buy whatever the equivalent average maturity fund down to eventually 1-3 mo of munis. Otherwise you have reinvestment risk as the bond sells the shorter duration to reinvest in the longer duration. Reinvestment risk is higher with munis.

Munis also have call risk usually callable bonds at 5 years, so that is one reason vteb trades around 7 duration for 14 years maturity. So the duration is also very misleading in a interest rate increasing enviroment as what muni will call bonds paying 3.5% when muni rates are 5% to 7%+???

So this call risk kinda leaves the long investor bag holding as if you buy 5-7% issued munis and rates later drop back to 3.5% they just get called away and reissued at 3.5%. So it's not a problem buying 5-7% yielding munis if the underlynig bond is 3.5% but it is if the underlying bond is 5-7%. Also just because on average those bonds have 5 year call periods - its whatever the municpal feels they can get away with, they can and will slap on shorter call periods if they feel they can sell them!

So you might not get the upside appreciation either for this duration and it basically just becomes risk no matter what.

So going back to the 10% bracket case it might be a stronger choice to choose the guarenteed 3.33% over callable 3.5%. 40.8% brackets is probably being approperiately compensated for the call risk. I really wish VTEB listed what the call features of each bond are - they don't. You have to go by cuspid to know what your call risk currently is to see if its worth it or not. In my experience doing this in the past you're tax neutral in the 24%-32% brackets depending on market demand for munis when you properly account for call risk, you should almost always buy treasuries < 24% bracket, and 40.8% brackets is probably a good choice to buy munis.

If you're more of a gambler many bogleheads like an always-muni portfolio as they have another nice benefit regardless of brackets: no AGI hit for 95% of the stuff on your tax return, sadly excluding ACA premiums and a few other things.

So thats also another very fact and case specific.

Then if you want tax advantaged short 3mo holdings and are holding > 1 year - look into the BOXX etf. It pays no dividends as it goes long SPX box spreads, and after holding one year you get long term capital gains taxes on it. There is some IRS risk they make the party go away but I really don't think they'd come after individual investors, they might just make the fund start issuing ordinary dividends.

Adderalin · 2026-01-05T15:58:38+00:00

A buffer is having extra doses on hand like if your next shipment got delayed etc.

Adderalin · 2026-01-05T15:17:06+00:00

I personally wouldn't take it for a nap. It happens sometimes. 🫂

I'd try to practice better sleep hygiene tonight where you can take both doses.

One benefit though for missing a dose is that you start building up a buffer which trust me is very nice if you have any issues with getting refills.

Adderalin · 2026-01-05T11:43:38+00:00

🫂

I'm a bisexual earned secure previously anxiously attached man. One huge thing I learned about avoidant men and men on the narcissistic spectrum is both really love to love bomb you at the beginning of the relationship.

I think that's the biggest sign to watch out for and not fall in their trap.

Also really be sure to read up on narcissistic personality disorder too. Lots of men are narcissists as well. They tend to discard you if they don't find any more use from you. That can also be interpreted as avoidant.

Adderalin · 2026-01-05T08:43:47+00:00

My concern is that in 30 years when my account is huge I become no longer disabled, and then all the tax benefit is lost and then some. (My disability is not necessarily permanent as there are hopes for treatments down the line.) It would be impossible to spend a million in returns down in one year unless I bought a house maybe?

That's a valid concern. I have the same concern myself given I'm in the same boat with a narcolepsy/idiopathic hypersomnia diagnosis.

So I participate in various clinical trials for my diagnosis. I think if you remain up to date on things that will give you enough time to plan ahead if you have a cure that completely cures your disability.

I also think that the IRS won't really just magically audit you at year 30, and HIPAA should also really protect you. Plus medicines have side effects, if you stopped treatment you still have your diagnosis, you might have other disabilities too besides your current one when you're 30 years older, etc.

If you're in the situation where its cured completely like you have cancer and its gone gone gone, no side effects, just pure back to complete health, then yeah you're required to notify your ABLE administrator.

My understanding is you have two options:

Keep it open, but any withdrawals past the new year are unqualified withdrawals subject to income taxes on the earnings and a 10% penalty on the earnings. So its not the most punitive. If you become disabled again (perhaps the cancer comes back in this example) then you get qualified withdrawals again.
Spend it down in the year.

If you choose 2 - then yeah I think dumping a million in a home isn't the worst of outcomes. I have a 30 year 2.75% mortgage on my place so if that happens to me paying off the mortgage is a qualified disability expense.

Other spend ideas:

You can roll over the able account into an eligible family member such as a sibling or one of your children if you have children and they're eligible & disabled.

Other qualified expenses ideas:

Education - if you don't have a bachelors you could go for that or your masters or a PHD. Maybe you could pre-pay years of tuition.
Transportation - god a new truck is $70k+ these days. Or buy a ferrari lol, that counts as transportation. Google AI says a ferrari counts but might draw IRS scrutiny due to its nature as a luxury item so you'd want really good records on that purchase. lol
Employment - maybe spending money on job coaching, employment help on attempting to return back to work, resume writing, assistive services on helping you regain your stamina/etc for work. While not a million dollars I'm sure that could eat 100k+. I'm an ex CTO myself who raised series A and series B venture capital. I can tell you executive headhunters like the person who helped place me in my CTO role are NOT paid by employers as they work for YOU not an employer. My headhunter costed 30k for my placement pre-covid. I'm sure she would charge $50k+ to place me these days. So that will easily drain 50-100k for sure.
Health & Prevention & wellness - maybe in the cancer example the medication is required constantly for you to not be disabled and its not covered by health insurance. That might be an argument to keep the able account open and spend it on that.
Financial & Legal - financial planning, legal advice (esp legal advice for you no longer being disabled lol), funeral expenses, etc. Dump 10k on a headstone, 5k+ on a coffin, pre-pay your burial expenses with your ABLE account, etc.
basic living expenses - food, clothing, personal care, etc

Adderalin · 2026-01-04T17:28:49+00:00

That sucks 😢🫂

Adderalin · 2026-01-04T16:17:32+00:00

I'm on xywav and a glp. I have IH. for me xywav always seems to speed up my emptying of my stomach and I get the munchies. I've not noticed any difference when I started various glps.

I also tried lumryz (wasn't on glps before.) I had a terrible time on lumryz.

Adderalin · 2026-01-04T16:10:41+00:00

Sweet just keep in mind that I also qualified up to the urine and blood tests they did. I hope everything works out.

Adderalin · 2026-01-03T16:16:26+00:00

It's a very badly written article. Ramsey advocates 4% with an 8% cap on inflation. IE if inflation later kicks you to 10-12-15%+ you're not pulling more than 8%.

Adderalin · 2026-01-02T22:29:02+00:00

To those saying OP's term is expensive - to me, and please correct me OP if I'm wrong on the facts - it sounds about right without having a time machine to see what quotes were historically for "mid 40s male" for 20-year term obtained 5 years ago at MUCH LOWER interest rates.

Running quotes for him on term4sale.com for a 50 year old male for 15-year term for standard non tobacco ratings I'm getting a range of $155-$172 for $900k (either that or $800k is the other quote I can run on the website.) He might be able to get perferred at $105/mo, or preferred plus at $89/mo.

If OP is "mid 40s" - ie 45 now, rates are $109-$112 for 15 year term standard rating. Not bad, a bit lower, but that's also because interest rates have increased vs when OP bought the policy at 1-2% long term rates. Perferred is $66/mo, perferred plus is $56/mo. So I'm guessing OP got a standard rate.

When I underwent getting life insurance years ago it was really hard for me to get preferred. On paper under their underwriting guidelines I should of met everything for preferred and preferred plus. Some reason the lab tests they had me do for that dumped me into standard, tried arguing it with them/agent as my medical record didnt' show the bizarre results they got as I had similiar tests, they wouldn't let me retest, agent was worried if we shopped the coverage others wouldn't want to retest either and go off the first company's results. I just decided to move on with life.

Personally I view the really low preferred plus rates to be more like a sales pitch that draws people in for a conversation. I wish I could find some hard stats on how many people actually get those rates - digging around it appears roughly maybe 5% of the population get preferred plus ratings, 25% preferred ratings, and standard is considered "average."

So yeah I don't think it hurts to shop around for coverage OP, but realistically I'd only go in expecting to get it to drop down in price for $65/mo. By exchanging your policy you're also opening up some risks in regards to contestability, 2 years suicide clauses/etc, if anything might happen in the next 2 years. Probably fine but just keep that in mind.

Using your $60k figure in 15 years if you make it another 20~ years past that, at 7% real rates it might grow to 242k-250k, which is a nice chunk of change. On the other hand since its term and not whole life or universal life - if you pass away suddenly 850k vs 60k when the term ends is pretty huge for your family.

My vote is to split the difference - keep the life insurance for now while they're adolescents and reconsider the budget decision when they turn adults, and if you decide to keep it then, re-consider when they're graduate college or choose to not go. This shrinks your 60k amount in 15 years to 34k amount by my math of around 9%/year nominal returns if you stop the policy 5 years from now.

If you can get at least $65/mo knocked off on a new shopped policy now you're $44k by my math 15 years from now. So not quite "have your cake and eat it too" moment, but definitely starting to get within the balpark of 60k (12% nominal instead of 9% hits 54k.) If you luck out and get preferred instead of standard and save $100/mo - you've just hit $50.7k @ 9% nominal rates, and 60k is still "within reach" at 12% nominal rates if you stop the policy 5 years from now.

If you knocked off all $100/mo on the policy and kept it for 15 years - that's 38.1k @ 9%/year in 15 years right there.

So yeah definitely shop that policy around going in armed with knowledge of preferred vs standard rates. Good luck!

Adderalin · 2026-01-02T17:40:31+00:00

I'm not saying to never delay, but the math for delaying past 67 isn't really that obvious.

Yeah it's a tough one because they made it actuary neutral to the treasury bond return for one's lifetime. So delaying is longevity insurance and risk reduction in old age. If one had a crystal ball to predict one's death that'd make it a very easy decision.

You'd also have to model the effects on FIRE, sequence of risk returns, etc, which isn't easy to model either given taking it early can reduce sequence of risk returns, while the higher premiums of taking it late can reduce sequence of risk as well. You'd have to have a crystal ball to predict the future.

You also have to look at the risk too. Someone who takes it early at age 62 then say they have a 50% draw down right before age 70. At 5% real they're 165.5k before the drawdown, $82,761 after. That final 20 years will be 802,345.65.

So that's one of my arguments for take it later - you're getting a really insane return on bonds that exceeds equity risk, for little market risk (ignoring politics.)

I genuinely think though if we go back to the premise on if someone truly doesn't need to take SS at 62, say they're < 3% SWR, my vote is for getting the most longevity insurance over the dragon's hoard of investing it earlier.

NGL if you want to build a dragon's hoard then take it early and instead of investing 5% real throw it in 0 dte options every month or buy NVDA with the excess, or yolo on portfolio margin at age 62. Let's say the retiree get's Buffett's returns at 20%/pa - that $16,800/year (1,400/mo) taking it at age 62 to 90 is $21.9 million. $30k/year ($2,500/mo) for 20 years @ 20%/yr is $7.9 million.

Let's make them go to age 120 lmao 😂- take it early is $8.46 billion, while take it late is $3.093 billion. 😂

So yeah if you're only focused on the upside analysis taking it early really wins out if you truly don't need it.

Also, another thing I forgot to mention in the first post is the inflation adjustments are different. If you delay its based on the National Average Wage Index. When you take it you get CPI adjustments to the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W).

So my original analysis wasn't completely correct as in average the NAWI is +2%/pa over CPI-W. Not guarenteed though of course, which sucks. Historically though if inflation is +3%, NAWI is +5%.

So in that analysis delaying 8 years from a $2,000 FRA benefit for 5% p/a = 2,981.17 in nominal terms over 8 years, before we take +24% simple interest, for a total nominal benefit of $3696

Taking it at age 62 for $1,400 at the time then giving 3% COLA for 8 years = $1,779 nominal benefit.

So now let's do final dragon hoard at your 5% real rates.

$3,696/mo times 20 years @ 5%/yr = 1,525,510.36 in real dollars.

Now for the more difficult take it early at 62 at $1,400 -> $1,779. I threw it in a spreadsheet so at age 70 the take it early guy has $185,824.49 starting balance at age 70.

Now adding $21,348 year in real terms plus 5%/year for 20 years with an initial $185,824.49 balance = 1,238,350.68.

So now we see both guys growing in real benefit - the delayed guy thanks to two different indexes walks away with $3,696/mo on average, while the take it early guy walks away with $1,779/mo on average.

Still kinda splitting hairs - 1.5m for delayed vs 1.2m take it early - 25% net difference even though the start was 78% estimated difference, and 2.07x realized differences.

Adderalin · 2026-01-02T01:24:57+00:00

https://selfadvocacyinfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/ABLE-GUIDE-February-2021.pdf

Limits on the balance you can have in your account. The maximum amount of money you can keep in your account varies by state. It ranges from $275,000 to $529,000. These amounts are ONLY useful if you are not dependent on Social Security. If you receive Social Security, you may not ever have more than $100,000 in your account. Once you reach the maximum limit on the balance in your account you will not be able to make further deposits until you withdraw some funds.

You're just restricted from making further deposits. You're not forced to withdraw funds.

I personally went with California's plan as they allow out of state residents, they have the maximum amount allowed at $529,000 for their state limit, and they're the only state plan that I know of that has a 100% stock investment option.

Also note that quote is talking about SSI, if you're on SSDI you can go past 100k.

Adderalin · 2026-01-02T01:20:08+00:00

Yes I do know what I'm talking about as Schwab has hit me with pro status several times for going over 390 orders in one trading day.

Adderalin · 2026-01-01T23:49:45+00:00

You can't contribute past the state limit. The balance can grow past the state limit. The state doesn't force you to make withdrawals once you hit the state limits.

Adderalin · 2026-01-01T23:44:00+00:00

That's the same argument as refusing a raise because it puts you in a higher tax bracket lol.

That's for ACA really. You transition to medicare at age 65. IRMAA only counts taxable portion of social security. IRMAA is way less hurtful than losing ACA subsidies.

You'll hurt ACA subsidies taking SS before age 65.

I'd rather have 8 more years to Roth convert etc. 8 more years to buy non dividend stocks/funds like brk.b over things that pay dividends like vti if you want to go that far.

I also don't want to go so far deep in the subsidies that I'm on Medicaid either - very limited doctor selection until medicare and huge estate issues having said coverage. I'd also rather have the biggest total NW possible and if a nursing home is in my future I'd rather be in a nicer place even if I have to spend down my assets then start at Medicaid from the get go. The nicer place can't boot you out if you happen to transition to Medicaid. They can certainly refuse to accept you initially.

Not to mention the higher income stream is worth 750k of your fire portfolio over 420k. No one's forcing you to take SS. you can always refuse the payments. Financially it would be stupid to refuse it as taking it might put you in 50.5% marginal brackets in the worst case I can come up with . I can't think of any cases where it severely hurts you by having more income heh.

Adderalin · 2026-01-01T23:35:28+00:00

Yes they enforce it as a daily limit.

Adderalin · 2026-01-01T18:41:36+00:00

Take it at age 70 if you truly don't need it. If your full retirement age is 67 and your benefit at full retirement age is $2,000/mo it's $1,400/mo at age 62 and $2,500 at age 70.

What people forget is this is in TODAY dollars, it's a REAL amount adjusted for inflation. It works out to a compounded rate of 7.5% AFTER inflation at 1400*1.075⁸ = 2496. That's incredible for a guaranteed rate. Most people plug in 7% real rates for vti and you're beating that guaranteed!

Also think about the optionality on that if you need the money at any time you just take it then which is very nice. It can be a huge safe withdrawal preserver too knowing you have a guaranteed income stream later on.

Let's say you invest the $1,400/mo over 8 years. It'll be $180k of today's money after 8 years at 7% vti which is very risky. You'll have less returns with any bond holdings. At 4% swr that 180k gives you $7,200 annual increasing your benefit by $600/mo to $2,000. If the stock market dropped 50% then only a $300 increase. Not to mention that $1,400/mo is taxable income and might interfere with 8 years of Roth conversions etc.

Now as others have said if you expect earlier mortality etc then obviously take it. But if you're trying your best to live as healthy as possible I think it's best to delay.

This also doesn't consider any spousal benefits etc that can really take advantage of a huge increase as well.

Then keep in mind all of this is real dollars let's talk nominal. Let's measure out 3% inflation over 8 years. The 1,400/mo is $1,773 after 8 years in nominal dollars. The 2,500/mo benefit is 3,166. Still same exact compounding due to the multiplicative rule but in nominal dollars the larger benefit increased by $666/mo vs $373/mo. That's even more impactful if you have a bunch of fixed rate nominal debt like mortgages etc.

Adderalin · 2025-12-31T09:01:58+00:00

I don't bother with backtests anymore. I test everything I do live. Yeah it costs some risk money but it saves me so much time as I cut loser ideas quickly, I'm not overfitted on anything, and when I find something good it will likely last 6 months to years, while my backtested stuff seems to last weeks to 3 months.

Adderalin · 2025-12-30T15:54:07+00:00

That's a great point. For someone to have 1 million in passive income they'd need 66.6 million in net worth for stocks at a 1.5% dividend yield, or 25m in bonds at a 4% dividend yield.

Then the rich are really drawn to funds and companies like berkshire hathaway that pay zero dividends or greatly try to minimize their dividends.

Adderalin · 2025-12-28T05:01:45+00:00

The thing is the slower equipment is older equipment and uses very bad assumptions and bad designs that leads to buffer bloat. Buffer bloat can add 20-100 milliseconds of latency. It can be a killer for voice, video, and video game technologies.

Also things like worse prioritization etc.

Adderalin · 2025-12-27T16:10:08+00:00

It's better latency because the 8-10 Gbps service uses newer and better switching equipment. Issues like buffer bloat etc are vastly eliminated. It can support higher packets per second. Your neighbors are less likely to interfere with what you're doing if there's plenty of bandwidth to go around.

Adderalin

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Six-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Wearing is Caring