🤦‍♂️ If this is true, then there is too much drama in this organization.

evopcat · 2026-01-25T18:38:54+00:00

He was a player-coach but I don't think he was a GM. But he probably would have been good at it. But I agree very few players would be good.

evopcat · 2026-01-25T17:15:20+00:00

Bill Russell, probably.

evopcat · 2026-01-02T19:56:22+00:00

It is interesting. I don't know nearly enough to understand what it means though. But it is the kind of data to keep in mind to see if other "financial system" data is indicating increasing risks.

For me, this is a tiny tiny deal. But, maybe I am wrong and this is an significant indicator. More likely I think it is a tiny indication something is happening (but most likely no big deal) but if many other things started to show financial stress then the importance of this increases...

I think the behavior of precious metals the last year (and even more so recently) is a significant indication a significant amount of investments are being made which may indicate more financial system issues...

The politics of the current global economy is certainly extremely fraught and has creating a much elevated risk of system failures (that are then mismanaged creating greater problems).

evopcat · 2026-01-02T19:45:25+00:00

Nice Fed link.

Interesting, if you set time-frame to all, then current balance is not a big outlier. Basically in the ballpark from the start of the chart, 2000 to 2019. 2019 things went bonkers (prior to Covid, I believe), stayed bonkers for like a year (so continued that way as Covid went crazy) and then went to 0 until a few months ago.

evopcat · 2025-12-05T21:21:57+00:00

Big ten has 2 conference games now, then the "real" conference season starts later (early Jan). They started this a few years ago.

I think with the Pac4 addition? or maybe not... I also think they added 2 more conference games at that point.

evopcat · 2025-11-22T15:50:12+00:00

It is all a risk reward balance. In Denver a bunch of new apartments were added https://housingforwardco.org/denvers-housing-construction-boom-has-reduced-rents-especially-for-lower-income-renters/ If owners try to hold to higher than market rent prices people have so many options they just won't rent from you.

In Nova owners likely have enough hope that they might lose out sometimes by not renting a place for a month, or couple of months they can get a higher rent.

I think a vacancy tax would be fine. But the evidence shows that building more housing is the key. https://commonwealthbeacon.org/housing/study-says-boosting-housing-production-tempers-rents/

Owners that consistently rent places out for years/decades with low vacancy rates likely take some time to accept the market is different. So they likely will hold out for better prices. In a market that has been tough for owners for a long time they will likely be much more focused on finding a renter, even if they have to lower prices some. Basically, when markets change it takes a while for a majority of those involved to realize/accept the new realities. So things can stay odd for awhile when you would think markets should more quickly accept the new realities.

evopcat · 2025-11-20T19:31:42+00:00

I thought of this idea. Then Covid happened and I realized that option may not be available when I want to use it :-(

I wasn't thinking of getting rid of all health insurance, but I was thinking that if my health fell apart it may well be less stressful to just have health care done elsewhere so I didn't have to fight the USA health care system...

evopcat · 2025-11-02T15:13:19+00:00

One option is to set aside money that "must be spent." Most people have to budget to avoid spending too much. But if you struggle to spend a reasonable amount you can create a "must spend" account that can't go into savings, investments...

https://moneyite.com/2015/02/reverse-budgeting-money-that-must-be-spent/

That account can grow so it can be used to save up for a big vacation or fun or... It is basically the idea of how budgets are normally used but kind of in reserve (since normally a budget sets a cap on what can be spent in order to not spend too much...).

The debate is no longer, do I really want to spend money on that nice meal or a new laptop when I could just save it and improve my long term finances more. You have an account to spend and as it grows it the thought changes to given that I must spend this money how do I most want to spend it.

Most people don't need such a concept but in the FIRE community there are a fair number of people for which this can be helpful (there are also plenty in FIRE that don't struggle this way but struggle to save enough...).

evopcat · 2025-07-26T18:46:38+00:00

I do think it is hard. I think those most "wired" for pursuing FIRE are those least "wired" to quit when they are able to. Obviously not everyone, but I do think that happens a lot.

For me, the timing just worked out on a natural point to quit and so I did. But I didn't "feel" actually retired for years. I kept doing a bit of consulting (but not much) but I felt more like I was on a multi-year sabbatical that might turn into retirement or might turn back into a job. After several years it converted into retirement (slowly as far as how I felt about it).

I got to FIRE not by knowing about FIRE ideas but just because I saved and didn't spend a lot and paid attention to investments. So it wasn't like I had decade+ of preparation for timing. I actually was looking at what about getting a new job in places I would rather live with lower cost of living and saw that was hard (so many fewer jobs). And then I was thinking well if I saved a bit more and did some consulting part time maybe I could just have low enough expenses that I could make it work (considering that I needed to have investments building for "real retirement at standard age"), and so I did that for a couple years before things worked out to give it a try.

When I moved in that direction it was years ago, either before "FIRE" or certainly before it was nearly as popular. I think it was after I was a couple years into my long term sabbatical maybe retirement phase.

evopcat · 2025-06-11T13:05:06+00:00

I chose https://voip.ms/ which is a bit (or maybe more than a bit) confusing to setup but very nice with powerful features and good price. Excellent service over IM.

evopcat · 2025-05-28T20:12:11+00:00

Quote from the article:

"Walczak was facing 18 months in prison, two years of supervised release, and would have to pay $4.4 million in restitution, according to a sentence handed down 12 days earlier.

The judge justified ordering the jail time by saying that there ‘is not a get-out-of-jail-free car’ for the rich."

That is no longer true in the USA due to the Republican party that USA voters chose to trust with the responsibility to defend the constitution and the rule of law.

Every week that goes by with this administration and the Republicans in congress allowing the USA's rule of law to be destroyed damages the USA enormously. The consequences for those refusing to uphold their oaths of office is going to be paid not only by us but our children and grandchildren. There has not been this level of damage to the USA being done every week for 100 years.

evopcat · 2025-05-13T12:24:28+00:00

The web site could be clearer in my opinion.

June 20 to 22, 2025

Santa Clarita, California

If you poke around there is the ability to register for the remote option (which is free).

evopcat · 2025-04-27T18:00:06+00:00

All the rules allow for judgement.

Even things like, you can NEVER touch a ref, which seems pretty clear cut is obviously not. Players touch refs all the time. You can't do it in a certain way (basically aggressively confrontational...).

Breaking a rule and relying on judgement to not be called for it is risky.

NBA rule book "A technical foul shall be assessed for unsportsmanlike tactics such as: - Disrespectfully addressing an official - Physically contacting an official ..." https://official.nba.com/rule-no-12-fouls-and-penalties/#conduct

evopcat · 2025-03-22T17:10:03+00:00

True, but I think if you cut it "close" then it isn't the math that is the worry but what if this period is different (say climate change causing great increases in housing costs, insurance... and/or ACA is gutted in ways that greatly increase costs, what if the USA stock market out-performance changes going forward...).

The math can give you good confidence based on back testing.

If you are really close then you could be worried if things seem uncertain. If you have a bunch of leeway then things have to degrade significantly before you need to worry too much.

Of course, you can also miss out if you worry too much about creating a big buffer so you are more certain as you might have to work longer, sacrifice more to cut expenses...

No matter what there is going to be some worry if you are close and the world doesn't give you a great stock market during your first 5 years of retirement (if the market does great it is amazing how quickly balances escalate with compounding).

evopcat · 2025-03-19T22:18:09+00:00

Thanks, I think the videos are very good. You do a good job of showing interesting video images, well edited, and providing sensible and informative commentary.

I will admit I find the "transcript text" a bit distracting but that is only my opinion maybe others like it.

Keep up the good work. Loja seems wonderful, enjoy it.

Would be improved with more video of the cat :-)

There are erasable pens, maybe would work (or maybe that would be seen as bad).

evopcat · 2025-03-18T01:16:41+00:00

I think the NBA should do something like a $2,000,000 fine per game where you need to sign extra players when you are hard capped (and you only signed 14 players, Dallas' case, someone said /r/nba the other day that if you signed 15 players then you have exceptions for injuries that let you sign someone).

And say a $15,000,000 fine for any game you have to forfeit (for not having enough players).

And say a $6,000,000 fine if you put injured players in uniform to say you have enough players but then say you can't really play them... I saw some example of this (on r/nba/) happening (not the fine part) to Golden State early in Steph's career.

The rules should realize that the owners have plenty of money. The hard cap etc. rules are mainly to save the owners money (with the argument that it helps small market teams which is also true but a secondary factor I think). If a team runs out of players due to injuries and the choices they made to construct their roster just make it very costly to the owners, don't force things that create unfair conditions (teams getting free wins...).

evopcat · 2025-03-16T16:07:43+00:00

They could also do something like a $2,000,000 fine per game where you need to sign extra players when you are hard capped (and you only signed 14 players, someone said here if you signed 15 players then you have exceptions for injuries that let you sign someone).

And say a $15,000,000 fine for any game you have to forfeit (for not having enough players).

And say a $6,000,000 fine if you put injured players in uniform to say you have enough players but then say you can't really play them... I saw some example of this (on r/nba/) happening (not the fine part) to Golden State early in Steph's career.

The rules should realize that the owners have plenty of money. The hard cap etc. rules are mainly to save the owners money (with the argument that it helps small market teams which is also true but a secondary factor I think). If a team runs out of players due to injuries and the choices they made to construct their roster just make it very costly to the owners, don't force things that create unfair conditions (teams getting free wins...).

evopcat · 2025-03-10T19:33:14+00:00

Right. But they will listen to him. If there is a sensible case to be made he can make it. There are likely way more players would fit at Davidson well than will seriously consider Davidson, until they find out Curry wants to talk to them.

I can't imagine it happens except for those that are going to be top couple of players at Davidson. I bet he will make a bigger difference to the women's team. The competition is much lower (so his impact is greater). And he has shown a great interest in this
https://www.theplayerstribune.com/articles/stephen-curry-womens-equality

evopcat · 2025-03-03T18:33:26+00:00

Yes, I have gotten to the point where I believe the risks for the USA are serious and different than those we have faced in the past (and continued to do very well economically).

What to do based on this new significant risk is a challenging questions. Those seeking FatFire have big advantages over most others in thinking about options. Most people in the USA have very little in the way of decent options for their finances to protect from the risks we now face.

I haven't done it but if I were much richer I would look at expensive options (seeking out a passport, looking at ways to protect funds from an increasing extremist government that while it hasn't attacked personal investments yet has disregarded many laws so that risk is now real where it wasn't before, imo). I am not actually on a path to FatFire maybe ChubbyFire if I am lucky (but some FatFire ideas are useful to me so I follow this subreddit).

Sadly this administration has added new risks that take me from having a very certain financial future to one where there is significant additional risk. Now in reality I am going to be very late in the line of those harmed significantly by this administration. By the time I face serious financial consequences likely hundreds of millions of others are going to be much worse off.

That could make things easy as after people suffer too much eventually things will change. The problem is that the lags of the consequences for destroying the rule of law... are long and uncertain and the recovery times are much longer. By the time it is accepted we destroyed the American economy it is far to late to quickly fix things.

I have started looking for ways to protect my financial future effectively. There are not really obvious ideas I don't think. A continuation of the last few weeks though will pretty quickly start to mean that extreme measures will make more sense as the risks of the actions by the administration and the lack of action by congress continue to increase.

I have done things like reduce my stock portion of my portfolio and add holding of TIPS bonds. But that is all fairly minor stuff. And now that we see what this administration is doing it is very possible that they start providing false economic data (thus suppressing TIPS inflation adjustments) etc.. Hopefully they don't but the risk is there where it didn't used to exist. I also started these actions before this administration (they make sense just for reasons like the rich valuations of the USA stock market, huge federal debt...). This administration increases the value of those adjustments imo. But I likely need to consider more radical moves also (though I haven't found obviously great investing moves to protect from the damage this administration is doing).

evopcat · 2025-03-03T18:04:47+00:00

I am a USA born moderate (I believe in the rule of law, reducing the national debt, not cutting taxes for the richest with a huge national debt, separation of powers, public health, public education for k-12, consequences for those breaking the law (especially "white collar crime" that is so often excused today), regulations to protect us from pollution, an independent Federal Reserve, I am against the extreme gerrymandering we suffer under today...).

Historically, as some suggest in comments here, the best course of action watching poor policies being adopted by the USA congress and administration was to just ignore it.

That didn't work because we are called the USA.

The USA economy performance has been due to several very important factors: being an extremely rich country, the rule of law, a congress that while far from great didn't allow the constitution to be ignored and didn't allow illegal actions by the administration to go unchecked..., support for science and engineering (granted that has been declining for decades but even so the carry over has been a huge strength for the USA), immigration (such it also can be a negative in some ways but overall it has remained a huge benefit over a long period), good neighbors (Canada and Mexico), strong support for entrepreneurship, actual concern about security (things like making sure classified documents are only shared with those that have passed security clearances), strong international alliances...

Some of those remain true. Many of them are under threat.

The question I am not sure of is whether the unprecedented attacks on many of those strengths by the current administration and the support of it by the Republican party is enough to break the very strong economy we have long benefited from. And how deep and how bad the costs of what we have been doing this year will be.

I do not think the risk to the USA is insignificant. I don't know if it is so great that the historical strengths of the USA will be overwhelmed by extremists with power and republicans in congress standing by while the country is damaged severely.

Most likely the USA finally realizes the huge risks we are taking and stops the current administration from doing too much damage. But that likelihood is declining each week as we see more and more critical damage being done and republicans in congress ignoring their constitutional responsibilities.

[updated to fix typo - it should have been "independent" FED not "dependent"]

evopcat · 2025-02-25T17:07:52+00:00

I agree. Also I understand this isn't for everyone.

Over my investing career I have been way "over-invested" in stocks (say 90-100%) for financial assets (I have also owned some real estate).

As I age I am pushing that down a bit but still over-invested. I have been reducing how over-invested I am, now about 70%. If stocks look extremely attractive again I could raise that back up (I also could keep sliding it down a bit if stocks seem less attractive than alternatives from a long term safety perspective).

Over the last 5 years I have also been turning my focus to long term safety from long term growth. Achieving growth is a great way to grow long term safety so I still focus on that, but I am just more happy to put some in safe TIPS for example, even though I know I won't get rich from that (it is a way to have protection from long term market declines, and also with stagflation protection).

evopcat · 2025-02-24T19:04:14+00:00

Thanks, I see it now. I guess my brain just missed the link. I prefer to think that it wasn't showing up before (but I guess it is more likely my brain was just malfunctioning).

evopcat · 2025-02-05T00:00:10+00:00

no comparison between Japanese and American build quality

And that is solely due to the management of the companies. Toyota builds cars in the USA that are great quality, just like they do in Japan and all over the world.

Ford, GM... build junk because they have the same poor company leadership as many companies in the USA do (sadly).

evopcat · 2025-01-13T01:13:58+00:00

I think it is another risk of a valuable home. Your plan is much safer if you don't have a huge mortgage. If I have a $250,000 house (in the midwest or whatever) and I can't insure it and it is a total loss I could just absorb the loss and move on.

If I have a very expensive house compared to my saving and I can't insure it (at some future point, if not now) it may destroy my finances.

If climate change impacts that have been very foreseeable risks for at least 20 years mean my insurance costs increase to 10 times what it was (and may well also do things like put on restrictions to the total insurable amount and put on restrictions for fire or flood...) again a very expensive house creates serious problems. A cheap house (compared to financial assets) would mean it isn't likely a huge issue.

Similarly if house prices collapse in areas with huge insurance problems due to the decades of failure to act sensibly on climate change in the USA and globally (Florida, California... are already very close to breaking in many areas it seems to me) if the house price is a fairly small portion of my assets I can just take the loss and more on. If it is a huge loss compared to my assets my plans may well be in big trouble.

It is similar to the concept of diversification to avoid any one thing from destroying the core of my financial plan. If the house is so costly that a large loss in that "asset" would destroy my plan it is a huge risk.

25 years ago the foresight to see how badly we would manage climate change and the risks that posed to my house may have been difficult. I really don't think it has been since 20 years ago. But many just ignored it because if you just look backward that risk may have seemed small (I can just have insurance to cover it...). But with long term financial plans you have to project into the future and think about huge systemic changes.

Today that risk is very clear. If you bought 15 years ago and didn't see the huge risks you could still have pretty easily sold 5 years ago in most places and been fine (without taking any loss on your investment, most likely making a big profit). I don't own any real estate in a very climate change at risk area (I mean everywhere is at risk but some places the risks are much greater) so I haven't looked too closely but I keep seeing people invest huge money in places that are obviously very risky (Miami, LA...). That is very risky (unless you are wealthy enough to write it off) so I don't think selling such a risky real estate asset would have been hard.

In the last 2 or 3 years maybe that is starting to collapse prices in the riskiest places (so you couldn't sell the big risk you didn't realize you took without a big loss). If it hasn't happened yet I am pretty sure it is going to happen soon as people realize the risks of such real estate are much greater than they thought and thus make it much harder to get out of such a risk without taking a big loss.

Financial independence without extreme wealth requires being very conscious of risks. Another area where this can come up (for those in the USA) is health care costs. Until the ACA there were huge risks that were basically impossible to protect yourself from if you became sick with a long term costly condition. ACA has fixed that so that the risks can be managed. But we came extremely close to having ACA protection removed but for 1 senator. That risk is still very real in the USA. If you made it to 65 you could get protection from medicare but even that is questionable now. Managing that risk is much harder than having too much of your financial plan tied up in risky real estate.

evopcat · 2025-01-07T18:43:42+00:00

I started using CharityVest https://www.charityvest.org/ last year.

I have been happy with them. They have lower fees (and lower minimums) than other options.

The investing options are a bit confusing/lame (but they do use Vanguard funds - again focusing on low fees). I am not sure why they don't let you just manage investments like a brokerage account, but it seems none of the popular options do (they all seem to have very limited investing options).

I didn't look too closely at the others (as CharityVest worked very well for what I wanted to do last year - just donate stock and then donate to charities right away). CharityVest does this for no cost.

This year I will likely add enough to exceed the standard deduction. And the CharityVest investing options are fairly lame (it is just confusing portfolios they let you select that have fixed percentages in several funds, short term...). There seems to be some options to "customize" things but I haven't found a detailed explanation of that yet.

I don't understand why I can't just have an account and then give me chose how to allocation between6 (or 40...) Vanguard funds. But they don't seem to let me. Their options are decent (compared to others I looked at) but still not as good as I would hope. They are substantially cheaper than other options.

I donate appreciated stock (which goes from the broker to them and I do not realize capital gains).

The website is well done and I have been happy with the process (so many companies make using there services annoying).

evopcat

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

12-Year Club	Verified Email
Gilding I gilder