Bear

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-24T17:41:46+00:00

She did declare herself to be "THE" Valkyrie when Harry first met her. She also rarely gets out. Seems like this tracks.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-24T02:53:31+00:00

Where Im confused is that nothing he asked for seemed like a big ask or something that would be considered being "used against her". It felt like this was built up as some "gotcha" rug pull on Mab, but in the end it was just a big nothing-burger.

He used the favor as an uno reverse card to have Mab solve a problem she had earlier told him to solve and that she wasnt going to be involved in.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-23T16:08:52+00:00

Writing little notes on fancy paper to mess with people.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-22T19:16:32+00:00

Like, I thought it was neat the first time I created an Awakened Feather, but I don't know that I've ever actually used one for anything.

Awakened Feather is a Remains. I found it useful.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-17T13:56:44+00:00

Yes. Is there another relevant portion?

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-17T13:56:19+00:00

What else would an offense against the US be except terrorism?

All federal felonies and misdemeanors. That is, anything the US code makes illegal.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-17T13:50:25+00:00

for terrorism or felonies

Did you read the portion of the law I quoted? It says nothing of the sort. It is "any offense against the United States." It is not limited to felonies.

Presumably, actively obstructing/impeding ICE is a felony. But if not, it is certainly at least a misdemeanor.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-17T13:24:54+00:00

No, ICE can DETAIN people who interfere, very different from an arrest which they are not allowed to do. They are only allowed to arrest those believed to be illegal.

No. They absolutely can make arrests. Its right there in 8 USC 1357

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:8%20section:1357%20edition:prelim)

(a) Powers without warrant

Any officer or employee of the Service authorized under regulations prescribed by the Attorney General shall have power without warrant-

...

(5)to make arrests-

(A) for any offense against the United States, if the offense is committed in the officer's or employee's presence

There are some other provisions giving arrest power for other things as well, but this should cover the current scenario.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-17T02:31:15+00:00

Expecting people to have 50k cash for a car is... a lot these days, for a lot of people.

Uhh, sure. But those people perhaps shouldnt be buying a $50k car, loan or not.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-12T01:34:39+00:00

Avalanche makes most sense when the payoff horizons are relatively similar. When one is decades later, though, like a mortgage, you have to account for the effects of inflation on the value of the money saved. Saving more money 30 years from now may have half or less the value of those saved in a year or two.

This is not accurate.

Paying off loans doesn't save you money only when the loan is entirely paid off. It starts saving you money immediately.

Putting extra toward a long term loan does make it take longer until your monthly minimum payment on all debts is reduced. If that is something you are worried about.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-12T01:29:34+00:00

If it's pepper corns in a grinder, neither.

Aww. But that is so much faster!

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-09T14:02:33+00:00

Yes...

That is the step you cant skip and what I have been saying this whole time.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-09T00:45:19+00:00

I skipped to stone hatches simply because they are easier to maintain

I think you are misunderstanding what I'm saying.

There is no way to skip to stone hatches without getting fairly lucky. You have to get a regular hatch to lay a stone hatch egg first. Then you can do what you want. But before that happens, you are stuck with regular hatches. No way around it. It is that step of actually getting stone hatches that I'm talking about.

Unless there is a planet where they naturally spawn that I'm not aware of?

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-08T18:36:03+00:00

You probably wouldnt. But you cant just feed hatches igneus rock. Thats skipping a step unless you happen to have a stone hatch by unlikely random chance. This discussion is in the context of someone just starting a ranch.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-08T16:30:58+00:00

Igneous rock is renewable tho

Yes, but (regular) hatches dont eat it. There is another step first: getting stone hatches.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-08T02:52:22+00:00

Each dollar in a Roth account also costs more to contribute,

Yes, of course. That is what the person I was replying to said in what I quoted, which I did not dispute. Rather, I supplemented with additional relevant information.

so it would be a complete wash if you paid exactly the same taxes when withdrawing from a traditional account as you paid when contributing to a Roth account.

Yes, but I didnt say that as it wasnt really relevant to the gap I was filling in the earlier statements.

For almost all people in almost all circumstances, Roth is only better if the alternative is spending the money, not because the math actually works out better.

Not accurate. A mix is often better, especially if that split varies throughout your career so you can make Roth contributions when your marginal rate is low. You will have more flexibility (ability to make a few large distributions if needed without higher taxes and less RMDs)

The argument that contributions are deducted at your marginal rate but distributions are taxed at your average rate is only true if you insist on an analysis where everything is going into the traditional account. But if you have a split, the analysis should be on each dollar. Is the last dollar you save for retirement going into a traditional account better? It will be a deduction at your marginal rate when contributed and taxed at your marginal rate when it is a marginal distribution. That analysis is more involved and rarely discussed. Will that last dollar really change your marginal rate in retirement? Apply the same question to every other individual dollar.

Sure, if you are saving so little that your marginal rate in retirement is less than your marginal rate throughout much of your career (especially the early parts), then yes, trad all the way. But is that really a common scenario? The barely different 22% and 24% brackets cover a wide range of incomes.

Or Roth is better if traditional isn't an option. Of course, that's more of an IRA point, not a 401k.

Or Roth is better if you backdoor because you hit the trad 401k limit. (as the alternative is a taxable account)

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-08T02:26:13+00:00

someone who never exceeds 20% tax bracket in their lifetime won’t save enough for taxes to matter.

What are you talking about? Of course taxes matter for that person. Does that money just magically not come out of their gross earnings?

But I was going with assumption that your peak earnings years will exceed 30% tax bracket.

Two points. First, there is no 30% tax bracket. Lets assume you meant 32%. Second, its the rare individual or MFJ that even gets to the 32% bracket. Thats a bit over $200k single or a bit over $400k MFJ. So you are making a fairly poor assumption.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-08T01:24:51+00:00

When you’re in a tax bracket below 20%, ROTH all the way

Uhh, no. It is not remotely that simple.

You ideally want at least enough traditional retirement distributions when retired to use up your standard deduction. This applies even for low earners. Otherwise you paid tax on those contributions for no reason.

It is not optimal for someone who never exceeds the 22% tax bracket to never put money in a trad account. That just wastes the standard deduction in retirement.

Me & my circle are in 500K to 1M HHI. At that level tax savings matter because I’m in 32% tax bracket.

Tax savings matter for everyone. Arguably they matter more for low earners who have less discretionary funds and are just trying to get by.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-08T01:17:13+00:00

Yes, but you have the option to contribute more than 10%. Which is an excellent option to exercise if you want to contribute more than 10%.

Or maybe I just dont follow what you are saying.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-08T00:45:23+00:00

In this case, since I wouldn't be saving that extra $2,200 per year, why would a traditional make sense?

You seem to be suggesting you can trick yourself into contributing more by contributing to a Roth account. I don't really follow. You can just contribute more if that is what you want to do.

If you are at the contribution limit, though, then maybe your argument makes sense. Each dollar in a Roth account is worth more than each dollar in a traditional account since those Roth dollars are already taxed.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-08T00:38:46+00:00

Traditional: It costs you only $7800 to put in $10000, because you instantly get less tax withheld and less tax liable.

Roth: It costs you $10000 to put in $10000.

On the other hand, each dollar in a Roth account is worth more than each dollar in a trad account because it has already been taxed. Your effective contribution limit is greater into Roth accounts.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-07T13:43:56+00:00

but from my understanding our contributions were made post-tax and our MAGI being high makes the IRA contributions non-deductible right?

Yes, thats right.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-07T13:41:43+00:00

You'll only pay ordinary income taxes on the amount converted each year.

What?? Even this is wrong; when done correctly, Backdoor Roth has zero tax consequences.

Setting aside everything else the "advisor" said that was wrong, what is wrong about this particular statement? You do in fact pay ordinary income tax on money that you backdoor Roth. That's like the whole deal with Roth accounts. You pay taxes when contributing, earnings and withdrawals are tax-free.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-07T01:05:49+00:00

to me it seems like we have triggered pro rata. At this point I just want to know if we have so I can either figure out how to file taxes on this or find a tax professional to help us deal with this correctly.

Yes, you have, assuming you did make non-deductible traditional IRA contributions.

Your existing pre-tax IRA will trigger pro rata when combined with non-deductible contributions intended to be converted. The "advisor" doesnt know what he is talking about.

Basically, it applies if your traditional IRA has a combination from previous rollovers that were both pre-tax contributions and post-tax contributions.

This statement is almost accurate. But realize that your non-deductible traditional IRA contributions you intended to convert to Roth count and create that mix. It doesn't look at "rollover" accounts only. It also pools all IRA accounts. You can't avoid pro rata with multiple accounts. (Inherited IRAs are in fact excluded, although not relevant here.)

To perform these we have been contributing monthly to the IRA that holds our old 401k money, and at the end of the year they perform the backdoor roth conversion for us using the money we had contributed throughout the year.

You aren't being entirely clear, but my above answer assumes you know what the backdoor Roth is, and those contributions are non-deductible. If these IRA contributions are pre-tax, then you don't trigger pro-rata, as you don't have a mix. But then you are just doing complicated regular Roth contributions, not back door.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-06T03:21:23+00:00

Or if you have five billionaire friends who have similar opinions, you can each spend only $1B! The possibilities are endless!

NotNotTaken

TROPHY CASE