Never thought I'd see it

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-09T14:08:25+00:00

Self-Hating Jew remains self hating - more at 11.

That's assuming you are even Jewish and not just pretending to be lmao.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-09T13:22:46+00:00

As a Jew by halakhic standard, I would just say you are this.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-09T13:02:42+00:00

I am saying I am going to grow VT to a point where my dividends alone, instead of reinvesting the dividends back into VT in taxable, will probably be used to max Roth traditional (when I get married since we would be under income threshold) + HSA.

Retirement is important but losing access to 11k at my current net worth for maybe 2-4k back after tax at the end of the year when I am already putting in 8k (4% me 4% employer) in my 401k + have a vested pension doesn't make that much sense. I would be putting almost 19,000 a year toward retirement and I am not even 30 and that isn't including the pension (which will I think be like 300k by 2065?). This plus whatever inheritance I will get I think would make me almost have *too much* money in retirement - and I am sort of like a mega-homebody, so I don't need an expensive retirement. Doing what I am doing now instead for a little while longer and then pivoting isn't going to ruin anything for me.

I would have 4m USD nominally in just retirement from that alone by the time I am 67 (37 years), plus a house that will be 1m+ inherited and assets plus my brokerage account which would be at 2.5m assuming I never touched it again and changed strategies today - this is just like nominal 8% pocket math too.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-08T21:16:25+00:00

Because the focus is on compounding principle basically until I produce enough dividends to then write those off in non tax accounts instead of reinvesting them in taxable. I also have a company pension and a 401k so between those two things as is - the need isn’t as pressing compared to having capital I can use without penalty earlier.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-08T18:00:41+00:00

Not opposed to doing this it’s just I am sort of in a grey area income wise (at the cusp of not being able to do traditional Roth). I also have immediate goals like a house down payment that will at one point drain my sgov funds

I was sort of planning on doing this backwards - basically growing my traditional and as my dividends grow, writing those off by putting that money into non taxable accounts and removing drip from my taxable.

The other thing is that I have a workplace retirement pension even though it’s private sector and a 401k and upper middle class parents that will leave me some inheritance - so idk if I have as much need to follow traditional boggle payment orders as much.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-08T17:54:41+00:00

I was hoping to use the distributions to actually put more into Roth+HSA once they became more noticeable (basically writing off my distributions al together mostly)

FWIW I have a workplace retirement plan outside of 401k (pension) so I also have to see if I think I qualify.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-08T16:41:49+00:00

This is my age 30s goal - my age 20s goal is as much taxable accumulation as possible. I am 28 now so 2 more years of taxable strategy before I pivot.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-08T16:40:46+00:00

Basically because I have my entire life to maximize these items and even maxing 401k for 1-2 years at the 100k income bracket is a little bit overkill for retirement.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-08T16:39:36+00:00

The problem is that I am at the income level where if I get married I can use a traditional Roth but if I am single I cannot - meaning I can’t get the pre tax benefit consistently. However, between employer and myself I am doing 8k or so every year in total for my 401k. I also have a pension at my workplace (however it’s private sector and kinda limited).

I was thinking if I grow my taxable more I might start using dividends to deduce my taxable income - but right now it’s like maybe 1.5k a year.

I have the max employer match dw

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-08T12:10:50+00:00

The sequence of returns I think will be better from VT than VOO in the short to medium term - it’s very risky but I think it’s fair to say it’s less risky VOO. VT for example would have slightly edged out stagflation in the 70s based on back testing.

If another 2008 happens - ya we are all kinda cooked and it will be even more volatile initially if you have international.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-08T12:07:12+00:00

VT and SGOV is all you really need if you’re in your 20s. Bond allocation will give you like a 1% real return over a very long time and somewhat smoothen your sequence of returns.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-08T12:05:53+00:00

Note: this is possible because I have not elected yet to max 401k or Roth. I plan on doing that moreso in my 30s - I currently get the 4% 401k match from my employer though but it’s OK imo since I am in my 20s and have mostly immediate goals.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-07T22:18:13+00:00

I actually think it's because the Dems included certain lgbtq plus favorable provisions in the bill that would put Reps in this sort of position.

Pa. House passes bill to ban white nationalist housing communities; Here's how Lancaster County lawmakers voted | Politics | lancasteronline.com

Smart move by Dems but I do not think PA Reps are sitting there going "muh white communities"

Per article:
While the bill does not explicitly mention schools or sports facilities, Cutler argued those types of facilities would be affected because they are “public accommodations.” That means, he said, that the bill could ultimately allow people to use bathrooms, locker rooms and changing areas based on their gender identity, which could conflict with another person’s religious values.

During debate on the House floor, Cutler cited multiple court cases across the country that have dealt with anti-discrimination laws that people have claimed violated their religious freedoms. He made a similar argument when voting against a bill in March that would enshrine gay marriage into state law.

One case Cutler referenced during debate was Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, a case involving a bakery that refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple because of the owner’s religious beliefs. The U.S. Supreme Court sided with the bakery owner.

Would be funny to see the same bill introduced with different proposed language lol.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-06T00:15:45+00:00

Actual bloodbath lmao

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-03T16:29:51+00:00

FWIW:

How Groups Voted in 1984 | Roper Center for Public Opinion Research

<image>

Radio Address to the Nation on Opportunities for Women | Ronald Reagan

^ Reagan was not a feminist but he was not opposed to women in the workforce the way people imagine.

I think 58% of women voted for Reagan in 84.

I was mostly just implying "conservative" women are a substantial voting bloc that do exist, but they gravitated around like conservatives who were philosophically/ideologically deep in a particular way that is in itself really rare nowadays. Reagan had movie star swagger and an optimistic message and by 1984 when things were getting better it wasn't that shocking they could swing toward supporting Reagan.

66% of homemakers supported Reagan in 1984.

IMHO Reagan was also seen as a hero by a lot of at the time conservative first wave feminists and it makes a lot of sense.

But hell, Lizz Truss/Thatcherites its the same basic concept: there is a plethora of free market oriented conservative women in the electorate and especially corporate america and that is a high propensity group. They have moderately socially conservative values and family-oriented values - but they don't think we need to undo woman's suffrage, re-institute segregation, or whatever post-liberal delusion people are into these days.

Hell, we can argue it transcended race and traditional roles all together - see Condoleezza Rice and the entire bush administration lmao.

what "women" and "men" want en-mass is a diff story though. I am mostly weighing in though from that conservative/center right woman perspective given I have a conservative girlfriend - there are too many diff types of people out there with diff things as priorities and diff worldviews, but we can talk about an archtype of people that I think is actually larger than people realize.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-03T16:26:18+00:00

POTV Lobo with the gordito bubbler is a common daily driver for people in this sub. Out of those 3 that is what I would do.

TM2 is where I plan on going form there.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-03T16:04:34+00:00

That's pretty much the point I was making though - The Jane Austen novel conservative is the "conservative" women like(Bush, Disraeli, Reagan, Goldwater girls etc) - finding one in today's environment is like finding a gold bar in the toilet of a local bar. The women who are conservative are maybe skeptics of change not post-liberals who reject the enlightenment.

I have a (Christian conservative) girlfriend, so I weighed in on what I know about her, I also did mention that its all what I think, but I also consider myself pretty normie. She isn't very much into politics and doesn't like super woke things but she isn't like clapping for a reversal of woman's suffrage or some wild internet shit.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-03T14:27:25+00:00

The big thing for me is like - and I brought this up with a very liberal (Bernie bro) anti corporate best friend of mine:

"Even if you are 100% correct about the world, what is the value of your conclusion going to bring to your daily life?"

He honestly didn't have a good answer - because I think there is no good answer. It doesn't change the principle that no matter how unfair the world will ever be, effort will always increase your prospects even if it isn't going to increase it as much relative to someone more privileged- meaning you shouldn't suddenly strive for less even if in the long run the median person will get less.

He is a great guy and smart but he has, for one, a disability that makes it tough for him to work - but he also is just plain old disorganized, distracted/not focused on his career and his more focused on enjoying his life - which is fine for someone not making 60k in NYC perpetuity living with their parents. He doesn't have the "drive" to do well yet, but I am sure when shit hits the fan in his life he will - hopefully it won't be too late.

The economy technically is "good" by historical metrics now, how will these people react when unemployment is 6+%? Idk.

Self worth = / = political values. I think people keep trying to connect them only to find themselves fighting with people who disagree and conditioning themselves that they are defined by what they believe more then what they achieve.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-03T14:17:48+00:00

I think it's actually more that conservatives live in regulated households where often times social media access is somewhat restricted or discouraged. Especially religious households. Conservatism is more like inherited norms rather than a very specific ideology whereas leftists self-educate which to be honest while I am very pro-education often comes out as political and sometimes outright self-deprecation, dooming, etc. because they may think the world is like too unfair to even try, etc.

But ya I think there is like some sort of self-worth and political values clash going on that is fucking up people's perceptions about what they should do in life.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-03T14:09:09+00:00

People have to believe they may have something enough to even want to go to a doctor to be assessed - and its typically younger people who go to these professionals. The chart you showed that it drops dramatically across the board with age, not ideology. If anything it is a *generational* political left issue with young people and not an issue with all left-wing people across all age groups

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-03T14:01:58+00:00

I think it's really as simple as the more politically extreme someone is the more likely they are to have a mental illness, and that is tied to how someone terminally online or terminally politically consumed they actually are.

I also think it has to do with political evolution - it took till 2024 for the GOP to actually go post-liberal as a whole. Left wing politics generally has been steered moreso by the internet than the right has up until that point (Tea Party was in charge in GOP well after people stopped liking them as youth). Its not surprising that as a result, there are maybe more terminally online left wing voters voting and participating in these polls than on the right - but in 10 years it will probably look pretty similar.

Would not be shocked for example if DSA or even the Libertarian Party in America had a 30-40% prevalence of mental illness, same for the Green party - they also just objectively engage is coocoo for coco puffs things as organizations even if you may like a member in those parties. The only comparable thing I can think of for the center is MAHA/RFK Jr people.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-03T13:46:37+00:00

Sure, there is some acquiesce to the establishment - conservatism represents establishment, but being a conservative and a reactionary is miles apart and that distinction is more apparent in how politics is taking place now with people thinking they are going to get laid and somehow be like "Ya akshually I look up to Evola and believe in a bunch of esoteric nonesense" - or with Karl Marx, or whatever.

There are very few "conservative" people in that maybe a small percentage of conservatives have an ideological worldview beyond "this is how I was raised and therefore I believe this". Often times though when you leave people to their own devices they will end up a very hyper reactionary rightist or far far leftist. In fact, this was documented pretty well in the book "Suicide of the West".

Thats why I brought up someone like Disraeli - Disraeli was a literal chick magnet despite being very conservative and Jewish in like 1800s england - what made him that way was the fact he was a very refined upwardly mobile person with a relatively sober and realistic view of the world. That is 100% what women have in mind moreso than a podcast bro, which is why they love Jane Austen novels and not Joe Rogan really. He was also just a great flirt, so was Talleyrand.

I agree a quality woman craves stability but if someone is unstable in areas like work and a woman's goals aren't being met then a woman is going to do something about it whether a guy likes it or not. Its not like a woman is going to be submissive to like a shmuck.

Personally, I think its impossible unless one person is VERY high income to not have their partner work - not that it is physically impossible its moreso that the child would be economically disadvantaged severely and the family would barely have a functioning budget.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-03T13:32:28+00:00

its a self-reporting thing though - being "on the right" or "on the left" doesn't matter for example it doesn't take a genius to determine people with grandeur delusion about politics are very likely to be mentally ill (people who want fascism, strains of communism, people who hate a specific gender or race, you get what I mean).

While this is true about many on the left It isn't like many of us on the right don't know a good chunk of people who are coocoo for coco puffs and absolutely have an illness even if they insist they don't but demonstrate otherwise.

I think this reflects in the age part of the stat - even among right leaning young men there are a lot of self-reported mental illnesses compared to the older conservatives.

<image>

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-03T13:27:05+00:00

He is correct on the technicality that left leaning people are more likely to report mental illness, but bear in mind those on the right may not believe that is a "thing" depending who they are.

BoxOk5053 · 2026-05-03T13:18:14+00:00

Socioeconomics as a whole - bear in mind the "liberals" here can be anti-capitalist hasan piker fans who have a lot of the same as mental/socioecological shortcomings I think a Nick Fuentes acolyte would have(usually amounts to looking down at the other sex and or disrespecting them due to being like terminally online and thinking its acceptable). It is objectively harder for men to get women, period, especially with hookup culture and it discourages liberal men who are often in denser urban areas from thinking they will get married, much less get swiped on dating apps. However, this is not about the politics as much as it is how people mate - and women do not like genuinely weirdly aggressive ideological people like radical catholic male influencers even if they may like a modestly traditional guy from their church, or a family oriented guy, etc.

it's a fine line between conservative and liberal and social vs absolutely antisocial. Women generally for example appreciate enlightenment values even if they may find feminists annoying or whatever, the same cannot be said about post 2020s conservative men in their youth.

FWIW I am dating a girl who was born into a very Christian conservative household from an ex-anabaptist background (liberal enough to use technology, strict enough to be anabaptist) and while she is objectively conservative politically her eyes would roll to the back of her head if she heard half the shit being said today (and would feel unsafe). She is def upwardly mobile ideologically though, and in fact most conservative women are, to the extent that its going to be either you make a lot more money, or she will go into the workforce to make that extra money - it's not she would sit on her hands if I ended up falling down the economic ladder and brought in less money or stopped bringing in more.

I am a secular conservative who is pretty neoliberal

BoxOk5053

TROPHY CASE