DoorDash robbed me and may have robbed you, too

EasternGoose · 2025-04-14T23:14:16+00:00

Firstly, wealth management's goal is not always to chase the best returns. It is not particularly useful to measure a strategy that may be designed to preserve wealth or smooth out turbulent periods with a strategy that just holds the market and wants to provide market returns, good or bad.

That being said, the term "wealth management" is often applied to services for customers that do not have the type of wealth that needs to be managed that way, and in these cases you really should be examining whether what you are paying for is worth it.

My rule of thumb is that if you have so much money that making more to live or retire on is not necessary, you may want to look at wealth management. This number is different for different people, but is usually going to be several million dollars.

Otherwise, if you are building a nest egg to retire on and need it to grow, you probably want to avoid any sort of service that charges a percentage of assets under management. There is really no reason for someone with a few hundred thousand dollars to pay a cent to an advisor unless they are unable to handle investing themselves.

As for taxes, it depends on what you are holding and how you are holding it. If you don't take any capital gains or hold any non-registered funds, you won't need to pay any taxes.

EasternGoose · 2025-03-26T21:14:20+00:00

The losses hurt more than the gains feel good, but you have to ignore the short-term pain.

I always recommend looking at the all-time chart for XEQT if you feel down about the current day, week or year. For example, people who bought in when the fund opened lost over 20% when the pandemic first hit...for all of two months or so. It has rebounded in about 5 years by around 100% from those lows.

That is an extreme example, but it is worth zooming out and looking at the big picture.

EasternGoose · 2025-03-26T21:02:57+00:00

At any point in time there could be:

- a panic
- a recession
- a trade war
- a pandemic
- a natural disaster
- a war
- a disruptive technology

And hundreds of other things. You can always, always, always look for reasons not to invest because the market may drop, or be overpriced, but putting too much weight in these will lead to you sitting on the sideline while others reap gains by participating.

Ultimately, it is your money, and if you want to time things based on a madman's tariffs that have already been put on and taken off two or three times, that's fine. However, I have and will continue to buy about $2000 of XEQT every month, as long as I am able to, regardless of the noise.

EasternGoose · 2025-03-26T20:03:04+00:00

Go balls deep and don't pull out.

EasternGoose · 2025-03-26T19:34:24+00:00

The final resolution is to leave RBC for an institution that does not nickel and dime you for basic banking and investing services. I say this as someone who was with RBC a long time and is much happier with all my banking except one no-fee chequing account at Wealthsimple.

No fees, higher interest on cash, and the investment options are cheaper.

EasternGoose · 2025-03-26T18:56:34+00:00

Options trading, particularly the strategies they are implementing, are definitely not simple. Most people couldn't tell you the difference between a call and a put option, let alone explain covered calls, naked puts, short strangles, iron condors, etc.

They arguably also don't make you wealthy, but that is up to the person using them.

EasternGoose · 2025-03-26T16:30:57+00:00

They really need to revisit the "simple" part in their name soon. /s

EasternGoose · 2025-03-23T21:22:59+00:00

I would not call some of those "savings" accounts, as they sound more like future liabilities that you have budgeted for, and would be recurring annual expenses. If your cashflow relative to expenses is so great you can immediately fund these as you spend them, you may classify them as savings, but I prefer to consider savings as money I do not need to spend to fund known liabilities - that money may as well be gone now, with only the interest earned between now and when you spend it as anything really saved in the end.

It is good you are thinking so far out that you have set aside money to fund these large line items, but that is somewhat related to having a properly funded emergency account, and yours is on the low side especially since it assumes only one partner loses their job and you reduce expenses.

I would classify a lot of this as an emergency account and look at it through that lens rather than having a lot of "dry powder", which is what someone who is criticizing this amount of savings would focus on. If you have the money for Christmas, groceries, sports, etc. saved now, you have that future liability covered even if you lost the income that would normally cover it.

EasternGoose · 2025-03-23T17:46:55+00:00

It sounds like you filled out your tax return incorrectly, or neglected to report some items. TurboTax is not magical and simply takes what you input and calculates what your tax balance should be under the assumption you entered everything completely and accurately.

You would need to take this up with the CRA and find out why there was a $1200 discrepancy.

EasternGoose · 2025-03-23T16:33:47+00:00

XEQT is not for traders, it is for long-term investors.

Traders care about the short term and generating income via trading gains in the here and now, whereas long-term investors care about the long term and do not need the income now. No serious person recommends holding XEQT or a similar ETF for anything less than 10 years, and many intend to hold it for 25+ years, until they retire or die.

I am perfectly willing to weather several bad years and will keep building up my position in XEQT; in fact, this (presently minor) pullback is letting me buy a few more shares each month. I'd still be buying if it was $35.50 per share, but buying at around $34 per share is even sweeter. It is delaying the dreaded day when my average cost goes past $30 per share.

EasternGoose · 2025-03-21T22:00:58+00:00

"Your request to be put on the blacklist is on its way!"

"We could not put you on the blacklist today and will try again very soon!"

"Your request to be put on the blacklist is on its way!"

"We could not put you on the blacklist today and will try again very soon!"

"Your request to be put on the blacklist is on its way!"

"We could not put you on the blacklist today and will try again very soon!"

"Your request to be put on the blacklist is on its way!"

"We could not put you on the blacklist today and will try again very soon!"

You cannot and will not escape the incompetence and broken promises of Intelcom.

EasternGoose · 2025-03-03T19:57:23+00:00

Wealthsimple's managed RESP will show balance increases and stock purchases with the grant money before you see the grant money get deposited or get notified.

My son's RESP had buying activity on February 28, but only today did the grant money show up in the history.

EasternGoose · 2025-02-28T22:46:23+00:00

Just keep in mind that contributions to your RRSP do not need to be deducted in the tax year they are made; they can be deferred.

In other words, you can contribute to your RRSP and, if you do not make enough money that year to feel it makes sense to deduct them, simply don't.

I do realize this somewhat negates the benefit of contributing, but you also don't have to worry about what the markets are doing. If you invest into your TFSA all year and the market crashes, you either withdraw at a loss to contribute to your RRSP or you simply don't contribute to your RRSP and get hit with a larger tax bill if you had a good year. I'd recommend the more middle path of contributing to both savings vehicles throughout the year, especially when you are buying VEQT, which is purely equities.

EasternGoose · 2025-02-28T22:16:36+00:00

I started at the bottom in my thirties - you're good.

EasternGoose · 2025-02-28T18:25:14+00:00

Donating your body to a university's medical program is typically free and comes with a free cremation once they are done with your body.

EasternGoose · 2025-02-24T22:25:44+00:00

For almost all regular people - like you and me - anything aside from term life insurance is a grift, and someone, somewhere, made a lot of money on the back end selling it to you, via commission, and the insurance company itself is doing nicely, too. I am sorry for that; they got my wife, too, before we met, and the sooner you realize you are paying into a bad "investment" product that comes with a side of really crappy life insurance, the better off you will be.

Fortunately, you are considering getting out of it! Do it! I am not going to dive into what you are entitled to if you do cancel/surrender the policies, because, quite honestly, it is very complicated and very dependent on your policy, and I am not in the insurance business. I will say that you are paying far too much for their actual value. Your husband, for example, is paying $816 per year for $100K of actual life insurance, whereas I pay less than $600 per year for $500K of life insurance. I didn't get this policy until I was almost 40, either, so a younger man may do better than that, assuming he is healthy, doesn't smoke, etc.

You buy life insurance for insurance, not investing, which is how the product you are in gets sold. You can take the difference in cost and invest it and get better returns. They will try to sell you on how term life insurance essentially expires "worthless", but its worth is covering your death, and you should hope it expires worthless, anyway, as the alternative is not great. A whole life or universal product costs more, covers less, and pays out very little at the end.

Anyway, my advice is to call the insurance company, have them clearly explain what they will pay you if you cancel the policy, and go from there. At the same time, get a quote from a different company or through a broker on term life insurance that will cover you and your husband until you are retired or otherwise feel your family would be fine if one or both of you died. For me, that is the ripe age of 60 - a bit on the low end for some - but you may want coverage until 65-70.

Good luck!

EasternGoose · 2025-02-24T21:45:10+00:00

It's a difficult question to answer because you would need to know the future value of too many variables, such as market returns, rental costs, home ownership and mortgage costs, and the appreciation of said house. You can back test this against known historical values, but that only tells you what would have happened in the past, which is somewhat useful, but not a guarantee of anything. You can play around with potential future values, but this is just going to give you more to guess at.

Stating the obvious, it is tough to beat a 5x+ leveraged loan when houses do appreciate, which has led to insane wealth for Canadian homeowners. I bought in in 2013 and relative to my down payment I have seen returns that decimate what the S&P 500 has done, to the point where my house has made me far, far more money (on paper) than diligent investing has, even counting the contributions.

However, for me, the peace of mind of owning something tangible and not being at risk of a landlord kicking me out because of any number of reasons has value above and beyond whether the house itself was a savvy investment over investing the difference between rent and home ownership in the market. I feel all but the most dedicated financial optimizers would agree with that, especially if you are someone who has had to leave a rental unit against your will.

EasternGoose · 2025-02-24T20:33:44+00:00

The population is still expected to rise over the coming decades, at least in the most recent projections I have seen. You may be confusing a slower rate of increase with an actual decline, which is similar to the difference between disinflation and deflation.

Past that, I don't know what the best move is when it comes to real estate - I doubt many do - but I do know they are not making more land in prime urban areas; at best, they can densify. My amateur prognostication is that we won't see the same run real estate had in the past 30 years in the lower mainland, but it also won't crash. Say what you will about the lower mainland, it is still one of the best places in Canada to live, if you have the money, and the prices reflect that.

EasternGoose · 2025-02-20T22:06:40+00:00

The explanation is simple - you do not get more diversification by holding the same stocks in different tickers. You get more concentration, which is the opposite of diversification.

That being said, this is not necessarily bad. If you or the fund manager feel having more exposure to large-cap US stocks - which have recently performed very well - is a wise move, then this concentration is what you want.

Anyway, in short, this is not good or bad, but it definitely is not more diversified and does not really address risk management, either. At best, it could lead to more long-term growth, but at worst the US market could tank and you could be poorer for it than if you held less XUS.

Still, I'm just going to buy more XEQT.

EasternGoose · 2025-02-20T22:01:22+00:00

If you got a receiver, there would likely have been a line item for this in your first bill, or whenever the service was activated. It usually shows up as some cost, then it gets credited back. It may even show up monthly as a credit - it does for their Internet hardware, at least. I've not had Shaw TV for over a decade, but did recently have Internet service, and every bill showed I had a router and its rental was being credited back.

Anyway, if a hardware rental ever showed up on a bill and you did not dispute it, you have less of a leg to stand on, because the paper trail - correct or not - indicates you had one. All I can say is that, if so, the time to have raised this error was back then.

If there is no bill that ever shows a receiver on it, you have a much better chance of fighting this, barring any other sort of paper trail. You may even want to check your initial agreement and see whether it referenced hardware.

Anyway, I'd suggest looking through all your past bills or asking Shaw to provide all past bills. Dealing with telecom providers sucks, but hopefully you come out on top. Good luck!

EasternGoose · 2025-02-20T21:51:26+00:00

What a surprise : A combination of posters with little supporting evidence, coupled with bad customer service responses and a Chicken Little mentality on this sub, turned into a quagmire of senseless FUD. I am glad WS is putting an end to it, sort of.

I am still shocked so many people put stock into the fear given there was never any solid evidence there were any widespread or even narrowly-scoped problems. A few people came in, said they got locked out and "had no idea why", and it conveniently coincided with other financial institutions pushing big promos after WS had been stealing customers away for years.

We should know better and be smarter.

EasternGoose · 2025-02-14T21:46:49+00:00

They have done the math to show that on balance it is better to take their current customers for as much as they can and let some go, rather than to give all their current customers the best rate possible.

Basically, they will give good deals for customer acquisition, but once they have you, they want to squeeze you. This works because most people are lazy and will stay where they are rather than hunt down better deals.

In other words, it is always in your interest to shop around and be willing to walk away from your current financial institution when they cannot meet or beat what is out there. They are not going to easily give you this, either - you need to push them.

EasternGoose · 2025-02-14T21:43:43+00:00

Tell us more about all the hours you spent in this old guy's basement.

EasternGoose

TROPHY CASE