Pay off debt or invest?

I’m publishing a whole series of posts targeting Debt … it has very little to do with conventional financial wisdom on this critical subject. Here is the second post (I have another one coming up, soon) …

______________________________

Gen-X Finance is polling his readers as to whether they would prefer to pay down debt or save:

If you have both debt and a need to save money, how do you prioritize? Some people will pay off debt at all costs before saving a penny. Others will be fine getting by with minimum payments while dumping as much money into savings or investments as possible. While others try to do a little bit of both. That’s why the poll today asks how you view this subject.

You should go ahead and answer the poll.

Now, this is such an important decision – perhaps one of the MOST important mindset changes that you need to make if you want to follow in my $7 million in 7years footsteps – that, for my new readers, I will point you again to my trademark Cash Cascade™ system (don’t worry, it’s simple and free) that replaces the Debt Snowball, the Debt Avalanche and most of the other other debt repayment systems that you may have previously tried.

Here’s why it works:

People make the mistake of thinking that there is GOOD DEBT (typically, investment debt) and BAD DEBT (typically, consumer debt) … but, this is only true BEFORE YOU TAKE ON THE DEBT.

Once you are in debt, then there is only CHEAP DEBT and EXPENSIVE DEBT. Put simply, pay down your expensive debt, until only the single digit ones (on an after tax basis) are left, THEN start investing.

This goes against the ‘pay down all debt’ theories, but works both logically and practically. Try it … and, let me know how it’s working for you?

If you’re well-heeled, you shouldn’t care!

If you’re not ‘twittering’, you’re missing out …

I always thought that Twitter was about “just got back from the dentist and he said “no cavities” … whoohoo!” or just about advertising your latest post. Well, it is both of those things … but, not anywhere near as much as it used to be. At least when it comes to ‘following’ (a Twitter term) personal finance writers.

Now, it seems to be more about genuine subject-matter-related info in small bites, as well as saying “hey, I saw this cool article on …”.

Now, that’s useful – even to me – and it will be very useful to you.

If you like, you can start by following me at http://twitter.com/7million7years … I promise that it will never (OK, hardly ever) be mundane

______________________________

Which brings me to a recent tweet from WellHeeledBlog, whom I’ve just started following:

According to Meriam Webster’s online dictionary, ‘well-heeled’ means: having plenty of money.

My question is: if you are well-heeled why do you even care that Vanguard Group lowered the minimum entry level for Admiral Shares? Of course, WellHeeledBlog may not care, but thinks that some of their readers may and is, therefore, providing a useful reader service.

My point – because I like and follow WellHeeledBlog and will continue to do so – is that I don’t care and neither should my readers … long-term. Many of you may care – today (perhaps, because you are only starting on your path to wealth) – but, long-term you should not care, simply because these sorts of money tips will not make you rich.

My blogging – and, twittering – niche is to take my readers to $7 million in 7 years (or some other Large Number / Soon Date).

On the other hand, I started $30k in debt and so will many of my readers. So, this type of money-saving info is useful in the beginning of your financial journey … but, not for long – and, not for the important parts of your financial journey.

Fortunately, that’s where I step in …

You see, this sort of ‘beginner’ financial info is available everywhere, and I don’t see the point of simply rehashing stuff that you can find elsewhere.

If you do need this kind of entry-level personal financial advice, go elsewhere, find the info you need, save money, and get yourself (partially) out of debt, then come back here to find the reality of how to get rich.

That’s my niche, and I hope you are finding it as enjoyable/useful to read as I am in writing it?

You DO need $12 million to retire …

Money Ning says that you don’t need $12 million to retire.

Except on Planet AJC, ‘Ning!

Money Ning says:

Can you imagine spending $11,250 per month every 30 days until you are 70? It would actually be fun for a while, but by the 24th month, I bet you’ll be tired of buying anything. And if you just leave some money left every month? Well, down goes the savings necessary.

These humongous retirement numbers may catch our attention, but they rarely speak the truth about reality. Plus, chasing a number is a never ending game, because there’s always a higher number to go after.

When I was still $30k in debt, and going nowhere fast, I calculated that I needed $5 million to ‘retire rich’:

- That was in 1998 dollars … in 2010 dollars, we’re up at around $7.5 million

- I under-estimated what I needed; and, so will you!

Right now, I ‘burn’ around $250k per year (land taxes, school fees, vacations; house upkeep; etc.) and don’t consider my spending anywhere near ‘Snoop Dog Lavish’, but it’s WAY over Money Ning’s “$11,250 per month” … and, I can’t EVER imagine spending that little per month. Really.

To that annual spend, I add my two houses (to be fair, I’m trying to get rid of the US one), and my two cars (and some associated expenses) … there’s $12 million, and I don’t live in New York!

Of course, that’s not what everybody needs … maybe not even what ANYBODY needs … but, it is (give – not take – a few million) what I decided that I needed.

But, when calculating YOUR ‘number’, don’t go for the money, do as Money Ning suggests:

Chasing a number is a never ending game, because there’s always a higher number to go after. If you want to feel rich, the more appropriate approach is to just make sure money is out of your way, out of your life decisions, and out of the list of things that you worry about.

That’s what I did … it’s hardly my fault if the answer pointed to $5 Million, nor is it my fault that I ended up cashing out for a whole lot more. And, it won’t even be my fault, if you do, too. 

Beat 80% of professional fund managers!

I’m disappointed! I thought that 7million7years.com and it’s membership-site ‘cousin’ 7m7y.com were important enough to be hacked … but, they weren’t

Turns out that MANY GoDaddy-hosted WordPress sites have been similarly ‘hacked’ – with users seeing a [false] SECURITY WARNING ALERT!!! message. GoDaddy appears to be working on have fixed the issue, in the meantime, please read on for today’s un-hacked post ….

_________________________________

Shawn at Watson Inc. outlines a sensible ‘system’ – one that I have spoken about before – that beats “80%-90%” of professional fund managers [my highlights]:

Some may ask what I mean by systematic investing. Peter Lynch (Fidelity), Warren Buffett (Berkshire), and even Dave Ramsey recommend a conservative and simple approach for the typical investor: rather than trying to outsmart the markets, use benchmarks to track the markets instead. For example, the Vanguard Index 500 fund has outperformed two-thirds of all mutual funds on a rather consistent basis (Cash Flow Quadrant, 1999). Usually over 10 years, these types of index funds yield a return exceeding 80-90% of returns of the “professional” mutual fund money managers (Motley Fool, 2007). Interestingly, the average millionaire is this type of investor (The Millionaire Next Door, 1996). Although there is no 100% guarantee, this method does dramatically decrease the risk over time and provides respectable returns. Provided that one starts early enough (i.e. before mid-forties), consistent investing over time can be the key to achieving a great deal of wealth.

Now, who wouldn’t kill for a system like that?

Well, me for one … and, I’m guessing, most of you!

You see, we (7m7y readers) have a very special filter that QUALIFIES us; it’s the title of this blog: “How to make $7 million in 7 years”.

Now, there’s no reason why you CAN’T read this blog if your target is, say, $1 million in 20 years … I can’t physically stop you … but, it’s ill-advised, because most of what I say would just be ‘noise’ to you …

… just confusing ‘chatter’ that sometimes runs totally counter to what you read elsewhere.

What I say here is ‘noise’ if you really do have very modest financial goals, or no real financial goals beyond saving and trying to become debt free.

So, in my “$7 million 7 year” context, I say “so what if I can beat 80%-90% of fund managers?” because the amount that I can make simply won’t be enough to help me reach my Number … certainly not if it’s one of my main financial strategies.

Instead of worrying about the pro’s and how the vast majority are simply butchering the mutual funds that they are supposed to be wisely managing, realize that investing in the ‘market’ (e.g. by investing in a low-cost index fund as sensibly suggested by Shawn) actually LIMITS your returns to that achieved by the market: 8% over 30 years in any market, 12% in ‘average’ times, and 0% (or worse) in recent times.

Try this:

a) Plug your starting Investment Net Worth (i.e. what you could scrape together to invest) into a compound growth rate calculator

b) Also, plug in how much you think you will be able to add each year

c) Include the number of investing years that you would like to have before you finally ‘stop work’ to live off the fruits of your investments

d) Plug in any number from 1% to 12% that YOU think an Index Fund will reasonably return over the number of years that you allowed, above

e) Halve the answer that the calculator gives you to (very roughly) allow for 4% inflation, for every 20 years (or prorate, if less than 20) that you chose, above.

f) Divide your final answer by 20: on a VERY GOOD DAY, that’s roughly (in today’s dollars) what you will have to live off, each year.

If that’s good enough for you, congratulations on two counts:

1. Thanks to Shawn, you’ve just found your Ideal Investment Strategy … and, it’s easy / low risk, to boot! And,

2. You’ve also saved 2 minutes a day, because this blog – for you – is just noise …. [crackle ... and, out!]

But (!), if the answer is NOT good enough for you [AJC: it sure wasn't good enough for me! But, it just might be good enough for you - be TOTALLY honest, this could be the financial 'tipping point' for you] … commiserations: your life just became a whole lot harder!

If so, keep reading … I’ll do what I can to soften the blow

Paying down debt IS investing …

Budgets Are Sexy [AJC: If J. Money really thinks so, I don't want to be invited to his Stag Night!] poses an important question: “Should you invest or pay down debt?”

And, he provides these guidelines to help you decide the answer:

Whenever you have any extra money in your pocket, make sure to take care of these financial priorities, in this order, before you do anything else:

1. Pay down any delinquent debts that could threaten your well-being or credit score, such as an overdue tax bill or legal judgment.
2. Accumulate a financial safety net. If you don’t have at least three to six month’s worth of your living expenses saved up in an accessible emergency fund, that’s the next place your extra money should go.
3. Pay down high-interest debt. If you have credit cards, lines of credit, or auto loans, with double-digit interest rates, attack those financial burdens next.

If you’ve accomplished the above and still have excess money left over each month, you’re in a great position. Maybe you have an extra $100 and are struggling with whether to invest it in your Roth IRA or to use it to pay down your mortgage, for example. The answer to the dilemma is simple: Determine which option is more profitable for you. To do that, you have to figure out your after-tax return for each choice.

I agree with the first bullet point: you must pay down any delinquent debts. You have to keep your head above financial water.

As to the rest, well, I think that we’re in danger of forgetting a critical point:

Paying down debt is investing!

You’re investing in your own ‘debt instruments’, where the risk is low (in fact, by paying down the debt, you’re IMPROVING your risk profile) and the return can be low / mediocre / high depending upon the AFTER TAX cost of the interest and any other fees and charges.

Your student loans and mortgage debts are probably LOW interest, hence LOW return investments.

Your car loan and credit card debts probably HIGH interest, hence HIGH return investments.

… and, you may have some personal loans or other debts that fall somewhere between the two.

So, I would modify BAS’s guidelines as follows:

1. Pay down any delinquent debts that could threaten your well-being or credit score, such as an overdue tax bill or legal judgment.
2. Put in place a financial safety net. Put a HELOC in place; make sure that you can tap into your retirement accounts, or keep some spare loan facilities in place in case a financial emergency arises.
3. Pay down high-interest debt. If you have credit cards, lines of credit, or auto loans, with high double-digit interest rates, you’re probably safe in attacking those financial burdens next.
4. Find investments that can outperform your remaining debts. If you have 1st mortgages, student loans or other loans with low single-digit interest rates, let them ride PROVIDED that you instead invest somewhere where AFTER TAX returns should be expected to outperform these remaining loans by a comfortable margin.

Once you’ve made the mental leap that paying down debt IS investing, you’re in a MUCH BETTER position to decide how best to use your money … particularly if you have optimistic financial goals

What are your financial flashpoints?

OK, I was all set to tell JD Roth (at Get Rich Slowly) that wealth comes from your actions, not from some ‘magical millionaire mind-set’ when I clicked PLAY on this video by the author of a book that JD was reviewing on his site …

… the video actually hit home!

I remember some distinct financial flashpoints that helped to set me on my financial path … for better or worse:

1. My dad waking me up in the middle of the night to go and watch our shop burning down

2. My dad telling me our (bad) financial situation

… not one event, but a series with the common theme: we were living beyond our means.

This hit home, and I resolved never to be a financial burden on anybody …. never to hold my hand out … and, so on. From a young age, I held down after school jobs, bought my own clothes, saved up for my own cars, paid for my own trips, and so on.

This is not unusual; many – most – of you probably had to do the same. And, we were not totally ‘poor’ … my dad could eventually solve most of his financial problems by going to other, wealthier relatives for hand-outs.

But, what made it a little different for me was that my dad hid all of this from my mother and my sisters … THEY believed that we lived a ‘normal’ upper-middle-class lifestyle. I actually lived in a different ‘financial house’ to the one in which they lived, even though we shared the same 4 walls!

No doubt, these experiences go a long way to explain why I am independently / self-made wealthy today, and to this day, the females in my family still live off hand-outs.

Yes, there are financial flashpoints that help to explain my ‘wealth motivation’, maybe you would like to share yours?

Now, this is a clever post …

Maybe it’s only because I recently compared personal finance to Vegemite, but I like this guy: he has the gumption [AJC: don't think this is the right word; any ideas?] to compare soccer to personal finance, then actually make it make sense!

Not to mention, it’s just plain good advice:

Spain is Soccer World Cup 2010 Champion. Analysts say that is because of their mental strength, their wily forwards, a strong defence and the hardworking midfield.

Apart from the mental strength, which is invisible, what’s visible on the field are three important components.
1. Forwards, to score the goals.
2. Midfielders, to control the game.
3. Defenders, to save, not leak goals.

I know you have this idea that I would be comparing soccer with Personal Finance. Here it is.

Personal Finance has three important components too.
1. Investing, to get more bang on your money.
2. Maximizing your income, to control the game of money.
3. Frugality, to save and not leak money.

And yes, you also need to have that mental strength not to be dragged down by “fear and greed”. And keep coming back even after failure.

Now, I haven’t given the whole game away [pun intended!], because Ranjan goes on to talk about the three types of investors … but, you’ll have to read his post to find out

View your 401k as insurance!

I agree with Financial Samurai’s basic sentiment, which is to effectively ‘write off’ your 401k and Social Security:

Every month I contribute $1,375 to my 401K so that by the end of the year, the 401K is maxed out at $16,500.  Unfortunately, $16,500 a year is a ridiculously low amount of money to save for retirement if you really do the math.  After 10 years, you might have $200,000, and after 30 years you might have $600,000 to $1 million depending on the markets and your employer’s match.  Whatever the case may be, the 401K is simply not enough money to retire on, especially since you need to pay tax upon distribution.

CNN Money and other advisers showcased super savers who to my surprise include 401K and IRA contributions as part of their percentage savings calculations.  In other words, if you make $100,000 a year, save $4,000 a year in cash, and contribute $16,000 in your 401K, you are considered by financial advisers as saving 20% of your gross income.  Your $20,000 in “savings” is woefully light because in reality, you are only saving $4,000 a year. With the stock market implosion of 2008,  your 401K has proven itself to be totally unreliable.  Like Social Security, contribute to it like any good citizen should, but in no way depend on Social Security or your 401K to retire a comfortable life.  I

Depending on Social Security is depending on the government doing the right thing.  There’s no way that’s going to happen.  Depending on your 401K is depending on people choosing the right stocks consistently over the long run, which isn’t going to happen either.

Because Social Security is a burden on governments and society, it’s always at risk of being watered down or eliminated … this is less of a risk the older your are (hence closer to receiving the payments).

But, not so your 401k: while governments can (and, probably will) water down – instead of increase – the contributions and benefits of your retirement program, the money that you contribute (and, your employer match) is still yours!

I don’t think you’ll ever lose what you contribute + whatever gains the flawed investment choices available may bring.

I look at my retirement plan (which I haven’t contributed to in years!) as insurance: if all else fails, when I reach whatever age the government of the time lets me access MY money, I’ll have something to keep me one step away from homeless … just.

So, I agree with Financial Samurai’s closing advice:

The only person you can depend on is yourself.  This is why you must save that minimum 20% of your gross income every year on top of contributing to your 401K and IRA if you can.

You’ve heard of Paying Yourself Once? Well, I think you need to Pay Yourself Twice™ … once inside your 401k (there’s your ‘insurance policy premium’), and once outside of your 401k.

It’s the money that you can put aside OUTSIDE of your 401k that will drive your wealth, because you can put it to MUCH BETTER USE (e.g. investing in business, real-estate, value stocks, etc.) than that money locked away inside your 401k and in the hands of grossly under-performing, fee-driven mutual fund managers

Managing your life through the rear-view mirror …

Not many people are rich, so following COMMON financial wisdom can’t be all that it’s cracked up to be, can it?

Case in point: paying down your mortgage is a subject that always gets a rise out of my readers.

I see it very simply:

If mortgage rates are currently 5%, what investments can give you 5% + whatever margin you feel you need to compensate you for risk?

How ‘risky’ is that risk? And, what do you stand to lose?

Some people, like Executioner, look at the 100% risk/loss scenario:

Although I’ll concede that it is unlikely that a broad index fund would ever drop to zero, it’s not outside the realm of possibility.

Sure, it’s not outside the realms of possibility, but has it EVER happened?

What’s the worst 30 year return that the stock market (as represented by, say, the entire S&P500), a basket of ‘blue chips’ (say, Coke + Berkshire Hathaway + GE + IBM etc.) have returned, or any solid piece of real-estate (be it residential or commercial)?

I’m betting that it’s not zero … not, by a long-shot!

But, maybe the rules have suddenly changed?

Neil thinks so, at least when it comes to house values:

House appreciation used to be a sure bet, but it isn’t any more.

But, I can’t help wondering … we used to say: “the market is going UP, blue sky everywhere … the rules have changed, it’s going to keep going UP”.

And, that thinking, of course, lead to ridiculously high valuations of both stocks and RE … and, a correction had to come.

And, it did. Big time!

Now, we seem to be saying: “no 8% returns for next 30 years [Executioner]” or “House appreciation used to be a sure bet, but it isn’t any more [Neil]” … “the risk/reward balance is different now [I made this one up]“.

So, I can’t help wondering:

If this is really the case … if things really weren’t different BEFORE (i.e. the market couldn’t keep climbing) are they really different NOW (or, can the market really keep falling?) …

… or, are we just guilty of doing more ‘rear mirror’ personal financial management?

I can’t give you the answer … only 30 years of ‘future history’ can do that!

But, if things haven’t suddenly changed PERMANENTLY – if the fundamental principles really haven’t changed – then, isn’t a ‘down market’ a GOOD time to buy?

Or, is that just the way that Warren Buffett thinks?

And, I know one which side of this coin I’ll be betting on

Financial rock’n'roll …

I don’t think that I ever mentioned it at the time, but I went to Warren Buffett’s Annual General Meeting in Omaha in 2008.

It was like going to a rock concert … without the music.

It was held at some football stadium, which was packed with 30,000 (maybe more?!) people and Warren Buffett and his long-time business partner, Charlie Munger sitting at a table with three large video screens behind them (just showing Warren and Charlie sitting at the table … only MUCH larger!).

They basically spent the day munching on Sees Candy (peanut brittle, I believe) and sipping on Coke …

Warren invites all the ‘international visitors’ [AJC: That's anybody who registers with a foreign passport as their ID ... I have a US driver's license, of course, but I heard that there were 'extra benefits" to registering using international ID] to a meet and greet.

This meant bringing anything that you bought from his trade show in the huge conference hall attached to the stadium (he has stands from a number of the 70+ businesses that he owns) and he and Charlie will shake your hand and sign it one item that you bought.

But, he stopped doing that – after 2008 – because there was a line of 1,000+ people waiting to shake his hand and get their signature. I know this, because when I got to him, the World’s Greatest Investor spoke to me!

He said (looking visibly paled): “Are there many more people in this line”. Sadly, I had to say there were …

Still, I got my $5 T-shirt signed, and had it framed with a couple of Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger playing cards (!), a couple of pictures that I printed from a web-site after googling “warren buffett”, and my round official entry badge.

Which has nothing to do with anything other than Bill McNabb – who replaced the famous founder of Vanguard (with their famous, low-cost Index Funds), John Bogle, who also seems to afford ‘rock star status’ with fans of his investing philosophy (which, naturally centers around buying and holding Index Funds) calling themselves Bogleheads and acting more like rockstar groupies than investing disciples – recently said that one “essential ingredient” in the investing and advice business, is:

Simplicity, which is exemplified by the “Five-Minute Rule” first coined by Richard Ennis of the pension consulting firm Ennis, Knupp: “If you don’t understand the thesis underlying an investment in five minutes or less, take a pass.”

This equally reminds me of a recent story of a company that a friend of mine was CEO of that existed solely to build, manage, and sell tax-advantaged agricultural ‘investments’:

Basically, this company did complex deals with rural land-owners, farmers, and so on to plant certain crops and sell shares to private investors; the advantage to the investors being (a) immediate and attractive tax-deductions, and (b) future (i.e. 10 to 30 year) capital returns … trees take a LONG time to grow!

Given that one friend was their CEO, another one of their key operations directors, and a third an enthusiastic ‘professional’ (counting, amongst others, my wife as his client) who positively represented the project to a number of my affluent friends who were also his clients, you may ask how much I invested in the company.

The answer is ZERO.

You see, I don’t invest in anything:

1. That eats or grows (because eventually it will stop eating, stop growing, and will die),

2. Uses tax-advantages as one of its key features (because I don’t mind paying my fair share of tax and governments have a sneaky habit of changing the tax rules),

3. Because of the 5-minute rule (if I don’t IMMEDIATELY understand it, I don’t buy it … and, truth be told, I don’t IMMEDIATELY understand much).

Postscript: because of the Australian drought, many of the trees did die, and the government did change the tax rules, and the company did go broke … and, many of my friends did lose 100% of their investment.

And, I still don’t understand the business 5,000,000 minutes later