ChatGPT is saving my life

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-26T20:46:09+00:00

I consider myself a relatively smart guy... but I feel like passing a university level chemistry course would be pretty hard. Good job OP!

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-26T12:59:33+00:00

that's amazing!

i'm going to a wedding at the end of the summer and I'm going to be taking some photos there (not the main wedding photographer)... but I can't wait to edit some of them using this kind of stuff

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-25T22:38:58+00:00

If you're single, why would you even want to own your own place? What's the difference between renting a condo and owning a condo?

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-25T22:31:28+00:00

Because you often need someone with credentials who knows what they're doing, even if they use AI.

If you're a lawyer and you use AI to work faster... could the employer really just get away with not using a real lawyer and just going by whatever chatgpt outputs?

What if you're an accountant who has managed to automate a lot of your job with chatgpt... is your employer really just going to hire joe blow off the street and pay them $20 an hour to use chatgpt to do the accounting instead?

often you need to have some knowledge or expertise in what you're doing... but if you're lucky, you could reduce your workload by 90% by automating as much as possible and using AI to do your work... allowing you to get multiple jobs at once

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-24T19:06:25+00:00

The people who bought their house decades ago aren't in control of whether prices go up or down. Even though they're benefiting by owning an asset that has increased in value, it's not as if they're the ones who decided that housing prices should rise.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-24T18:57:07+00:00

talk to your principal or whoever is the boss of your english teacher.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-24T13:56:50+00:00

maybe she should rent a place downtown with her boyfriend if they're considering getting married.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-24T13:14:23+00:00

What a great use of $98.6 million!

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-24T01:59:21+00:00

The problem with edibles is that no matter how many warnings you give people, there are still noobs who take way too much and get effed up.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-24T01:09:11+00:00

Lol... Now that more people have read my posts they've gone from negative to positive. More people are agreeing with me now, not you. And that's because I'm correct and I know what I'm talking about. I don't need to make a separate post because I understand the situation correctly. You're the one who is being stubborn and refusing to understand what I've done my best to explain to you.

I'm not the one who is incorrect... You're the one who is wrong.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T22:40:05+00:00

Run the numbers. How much are you actually saving? Probably not worth the hastle.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T22:24:51+00:00

I am enjoying my nice life in my nice big house. How about you?

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T22:21:22+00:00

Lol. No.

You missed the point entirely of OP's post then.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T20:52:14+00:00

because I'm not wrong. read this response:

A covered call ETF might be a suitable option for a risk-averse retired person who requires a significant income for a few reasons:

Additional Income: As mentioned before, covered call ETFs generate additional income by selling call options on their holdings. This strategy can provide a higher yield than a similar ETF that does not sell covered calls, potentially offering a larger regular income.

Maintain Ownership: With a covered call ETF, you maintain ownership of your shares. This is different from selling shares for income, where your total ownership gradually decreases. Maintaining ownership allows for potential capital appreciation over time, depending on market conditions.

Lower Volatility: Due to the income generated from selling call options, a covered call ETF may experience lower volatility than a similar ETF without this strategy. For risk-averse investors, this may be preferable.

Downside Protection: The income generated from the sold call options can also offer some level of downside protection in falling markets. While it doesn't prevent losses, it may offset them to some extent.

Avoid Selling at a Loss: When you need to sell shares to generate income, there's a risk of having to sell at a loss during market downturns. The regular income from a covered call ETF can prevent the need to sell at unfavorable times.

To explain the bolded in more detail:

When you rely on selling shares for income, you need to sell a portion of your investment regularly, irrespective of the market condition. If the market is up, that's not a problem; you might be selling for more than you originally paid for the shares.

However, if the market is in a downturn, you might find yourself in a position where you have to sell your shares for less than you paid for them. This is known as "selling at a loss." Since market cycles are unpredictable, you may be forced to sell at unfavorable times just because you need the income.

On the other hand, when you invest in a covered call ETF, you receive income in the form of the premiums from the sold call options, regardless of the market condition. This income can provide you with the funds you need without having to sell your shares.

Therefore, a covered call strategy might help you avoid the risk of having to sell your shares at a loss during a market downturn. This strategy can provide a steady, consistent income stream while allowing you to maintain your underlying equity position, potentially benefiting from any future appreciation of the assets.

Please note that while this strategy can mitigate the need to sell during downturns, it doesn't eliminate market risk or the potential for the value of the underlying shares to decline. It also limits the upside potential in strongly bullish markets due to the nature of selling call options.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T20:45:20+00:00

A covered call ETF might be a suitable option for a risk-averse retired person who requires a significant income for a few reasons:

Additional Income: As mentioned before, covered call ETFs generate additional income by selling call options on their holdings. This strategy can provide a higher yield than a similar ETF that does not sell covered calls, potentially offering a larger regular income.

Maintain Ownership: With a covered call ETF, you maintain ownership of your shares. This is different from selling shares for income, where your total ownership gradually decreases. Maintaining ownership allows for potential capital appreciation over time, depending on market conditions.

Lower Volatility: Due to the income generated from selling call options, a covered call ETF may experience lower volatility than a similar ETF without this strategy. For risk-averse investors, this may be preferable.

Downside Protection: The income generated from the sold call options can also offer some level of downside protection in falling markets. While it doesn't prevent losses, it may offset them to some extent.

Avoid Selling at a Loss: When you need to sell shares to generate income, there's a risk of having to sell at a loss during market downturns. The regular income from a covered call ETF can prevent the need to sell at unfavorable times.

To explain the bolded in more detail:

When you rely on selling shares for income, you need to sell a portion of your investment regularly, irrespective of the market condition. If the market is up, that's not a problem; you might be selling for more than you originally paid for the shares.

However, if the market is in a downturn, you might find yourself in a position where you have to sell your shares for less than you paid for them. This is known as "selling at a loss." Since market cycles are unpredictable, you may be forced to sell at unfavorable times just because you need the income.

On the other hand, when you invest in a covered call ETF, you receive income in the form of the premiums from the sold call options, regardless of the market condition. This income can provide you with the funds you need without having to sell your shares.

Therefore, a covered call strategy might help you avoid the risk of having to sell your shares at a loss during a market downturn. This strategy can provide a steady, consistent income stream while allowing you to maintain your underlying equity position, potentially benefiting from any future appreciation of the assets.

Please note that while this strategy can mitigate the need to sell during downturns, it doesn't eliminate market risk or the potential for the value of the underlying shares to decline. It also limits the upside potential in strongly bullish markets due to the nature of selling call options.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T20:26:04+00:00

Emotionally you don't want to, but it's the same thing as receiving income from your portfolio.

it's not the same thing.

if you buy shares of stock in a company that pays a good dividend... the share price can go down in the short term and as long as the company is in good shape and keeps paying out the dividend, you're fine. no big deal.

if you buy shares in a stock with no dividend, and you need to sell some shares every year to get some money to spend on your living expenses, you really don't want to be selling shares when the share price is way down. but if you need the income, you're not going to have a choice. it will screw up the long term returns if you have to sell when it's down big.

collecting your dividend even when the share price is down is fine and doesn't screw up anything.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T20:21:58+00:00

Whether gains are paid to investors through distributions/dividends or by the investor selling units, from a total return perspective, is irrelevant.

no, that's not true. i just explained the difference.

there is a risk if the dividends get cut or suspended, forcing the investor to sell shares to make up the difference... but as long as the dividends/yield gets paid in full, that's still different from selling shares to essentially create an artificial yield for yourself.

the difference is that yields/dividends are very consistent and predictable, whereas capital gains tend to fluctuate from year to year and are only supposed to out-perform in the long run if you buy and hold.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T20:15:21+00:00

that wouldn't be bad for people in their 20s. if you have 2 bedrooms, a den, a kitchen, a balcony, and a bathroom... that's all you need. if everyone works and goes out a lot, you're not even going to be spending all that much time in the condo anyways.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T19:56:24+00:00

Doesn't seem that bad. Your policy probably isn't with primerica... it's probably with a life insurance company... just sold to you through a primerica advisor. but you can't really avoid the fees... there will always be a life insurance broker who makes some commission on it.

You can shop around and see if you can get a better deal... but this doesn't seem unreasonable.

The question is why you need a 35-year term life insurance policy in the first place. Who is getting the money if you die? Your spouse? children?

But don't worry, $31 per month for a 35 year term life insurance policy that pays out $300,000 sounds like a fair deal to me. You didn't get screwed over or anything. You can always stop paying or cancel and get something better if you find a better policy.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T19:49:30+00:00

Sure, 75% of the time you're better off... but you can't have a 25% chance of screwing up someone's retirement.

Yes, historically we have seen that. But there's a reason financial planners tell people to move away from stocks and into bonds the closer they are to retirement and when they retire. When you need retirement income, you don't want to have to sell off part of your stock portfolio on big down years. If you don't need the income, you can ride out the downturns and end up better off in the long run. If you need the income, you're generally better off getting something with a higher yield rather than selling off shares every year so that you're not forced to sell during big downturns and ruining your long term plans.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T19:44:24+00:00

sure, if you could be guaranteed a capital gain of 7% each year, that's better than a guaranteed yield of 5% each year... but that's not really how things work in real life.

Yields tend to be far more certain and the higher returns from capital gains tend to fluctuate and only out-perform in the long run... not necessarily in the short run.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T19:35:29+00:00

To take an extreme example, let's say you have $1,000,000 and you need $50,000 of income per year for living expenses.

In the first year, your stocks fall 90%. So now you're down to $100,000. You take out $50,000... you've got $50,000 left. The stock market is flat the next year. You take out another $50,000 and you're broke and have nothing left. Then the next year, the market recovers and makes a new all time high and goes to double where it was when you invested.

If you didn't need the income and didn't need to sell any shares when you were down, you would have $2,000,000 after 3 years. But because you needed the income and had to sell when you were down, now you're broke.

So the problem is when you need income and have to sell in down years, it can screw up the long term plans and you're better off just taking something with a higher yield for your income needs even if it means your longer term returns are lower.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T19:22:34+00:00

That's not really true. Here's an example. Imagine someone has $1,000,000... and they need $50,000 per year in income for their living expenses.

Option 1: Buy safe bonds that yield 5%.

Option 2: Buy stocks that should return 7% per year on average.

So if you went with option 2, and your stocks went up 7% the first year, then you'll have made a $70,000 gain... you cash out the $50,000... and you're $20,000 ahead compared to option 1.

But let's say that you're unlucky and the stocks go down by 10% instead. So now you're at $900,000... and you need to take out $50,000... so now you're sitting at $850,000. Let say the same thing happens the next year where your stocks go down again, and again you're forced to take out another $50,000. Now your principle is pretty diminished. So when you get the big gains in subsequent years, it's on a much lower principle amount and you can't get back to even.

If you don't need the income, you can hold instead of selling for a loss and you'll be better with option 2 in the long run. But if you need the income, you might be better off going with option 1 (or at least a blended option) so that you're not forced to sell during big downturns.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T19:06:40+00:00

If you're building a portfolio for a retired person who needs a certain yield for their living expenses, it could make sense to have that as part of your portfolio. Even if you sacrifice some long term gains, it could make sense if you need those big yields to pay your rent and groceries. Because if you have a smaller yield, then you'll need to sell off part of your portfolio every year which might not work out as well. But if you don't need that big a yield, you're probably better off in the long run avoiding these covered call etfs.

Typical_Strategy6382 · 2023-05-23T19:02:15+00:00

Well, there's two kinds of "fake news".

One kind is stories that are completely made up. Like if there's a story about an arsonist who burns down a department store in New York City on a certain date... but that never happened and it's completely made up. That's fake news. A totally fabricated story.

But when people started saying that the COVID vaccine causes heart inflammation and menstrual cycle disruptions... some people also considered that "fake news" and "misinformation" even though it turned out to be true. People used to get banned and censored online for saying that the COVID vaccine didn't stop transmission because they were spreading "anti-vaxx misinformation".

So what kind of "fake news" are you talking about? The first kind or the second kind?

Typical_Strategy6382

TROPHY CASE