As featured in The Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and more!

Search: election

This is an article by Marc Pearlman. Marc is a money management professional who has been in the finance industry over 20 years, and he is the author of The Positive Money Mindset and host of the radio show, Your Money Matters.

I watched as these two were duking it out — at the poker table, that is. Fortunately for me, I was out of the hand with my lousy cards safely in the muck pile. I watched with no attachment to the outcome, but I had a prediction of who would come out the victor in this poker showdown. This young kid, probably mid to late twenties with a black hat pulled half way down his head had been quiet most of my time at the table, was squaring off with a middle aged guy. If appearances mean anything, this middle age guy was somebody of means given the designer clothes he was sporting.

Anyway, this kid makes a modest bet and the middle aged guy is quick to match it. Not only does he match the bet, he raised him with a smirk as though daring this kid to come at him again. So, the kid comes back at him with a bigger bet, and again this guy matches him. When all was said and done, both guys had all their chips in the middle and our middle aged poker wannabe had absolutely nothing for a hand. He tried to save face and belted out, “I didn’t have anything, but I couldn’t sit there and watch you walk away with it.”

Poker chipsEgos can be expensive that way.

All too often people make financial decisions out of emotion, which can be an expensive trap for those who have their ego firmly married to their net worth. If we look around, we can see examples of this all across the spectrum of income classes.

Years ago, I worked with a doctor who shall we say did not suffer from a fragile ego. He was interested in putting money with an institutional money manager who had a large minimum investment requirement and a lousy recent track record. I had suggested a manager who demonstrated better performance numbers and who utilized a strategy with less risk. “What is the minimum investment?” the doctor inquired. The minimum was about half of the other managers requirement, I answered. The doctor quickly rebuffed the notion.

It came out in conversation that his peers had money invested with this manager who had the higher minimum. I understood that it was important for him to be part of what he believed to be a prestigious group of investors. Making money was not his motivation, satisfying his ego is what dictated his investment choice.

Another story comes to mind. I once had the opportunity to work with a professional commodities trader. I was hired to help him with his trading deficiencies. This guy had strong opinions on whatever subject was being discussed. He could not possibly fathom that his thought process could be flawed. I introduced him to the concept that being right to him was more important than making money. He scoffed at the idea. In the end, he learned his lesson in a painful way. This trader would hold onto losing positions until he was forced to sell. He vigorously defended his position that he was right only to watch his once several hundred thousand dollar trading account dwindle to less than $20,000.

Ultimately, the ego he was trying to protect was humbled.

Here is yet another example of how our egos can hurt us financially: about a decade ago I had a wonderful client who has since passed away. Great guy, but wow, what a terrible stock picker! Honestly, someone could have made a fortune by simply doing the opposite of what this guy did. He held fifteen stocks in his portfolio, ten of which I had selected for him.Out of the five he picked, every single one was a dog. When I say dog, I mean dog with fleas. They were all down 70 to 80% within a year. I am not suggesting that every selection I made was a homerun, but we were profitable on average with my ten selections.

He would call in on a regular basis to discuss the market. He never wanted to discuss his losing stock picks. Furthermore, I knew it was taboo to mention my winning stock picks. The only subject that was not off limits was the couple of picks I made that were not working out.

When he passed, he still held those losing positions. His refusal to acknowledge his mistakes cost him well over five figures in losses, not to mention the opportunity costs associated with redeploying the money elsewhere.

Big egos often mix with money with the same cohesiveness that oil and water mix. Having an inflated ego is not necessarily the issue, but when your financial decisions are borne from ego, you are in dangerous territory.

Strong and sound financial decisions require letting go of your ego. Often, we need to admit our analysis was wrong and we need to cut losses in order to preserve our hard earned capital. Sometimes the simple truth is that keeping up with the Joneses is going to bring financial ruin.

Many times, laying down your cards is the best thing you can do for your wallet.

Photo: Ross Elliott

{ 8 comments }

It’s no surprise that politicians have difficulty relating to their constituents. When Mitt Romney was asked about his finances, he admitted two facts that would sound strange to most listeners.

  • Romney considers what he earned from speaking fees in one year, $362,000, as “not that much.”
  • Like most individuals who earn most of their income from investments, Romney’s effective tax rate is closer to 15 percent.

For Romney $362,000 may not be that much. His net worth is estimated to be between $85 million and $265 million. The most that income from speaking can increase his net worth each year is by 0.4%. That is a drop in a very large bucket. I can understand why Romney would say that this amount is not that much. For him, it’s practically nothing.

For most people, though, $362,000 is a significant amount of money. This small portion of Romney’s annual income could support ten families or more of four members for one year. “Not that much” is relative.

When President Obama proposed the Buffett Rule, a tax on millionaires to pay a representative share of the tax burden, he had people like Romney in mind. Buffett has pointed out that his effective tax rate is lower than his secretary’s, and this happens when most of an individual’s income comes from investments. Investment income, like dividends, as well as carried interest, is taxed at a 15 percent rate rather than the sliding scale used in the tax brackets for ordinary income. People who earn high enough salaries and wages pay higher tax rates than individuals who make a living off investments.

To compare Romney with his political peers and competitors, Governor Rick Perry has indicated his effective tax rate in 2010 was 23.4 percent, and that rate is closer to what most middle-class Americans might pay in any one year. Rick Perry is the least wealthy of all the presidential hopefuls, with a net worth between $1 million and $2.5 million. President Obama and his family paid an effective tax rate of 25 percent in 2010.

How does your effective tax rate compare to Mitt Romney’s?

Update: ABC News just broke the story that Mitt Romney has made judicious use of an offshore tax haven in the Cayman Islands to shelter his assets from the U.S. Treasury.

Tax experts agree that Romney remains subject to American taxes. But they say the offshore accounts have provided him — and Bain — with other potential financial benefits, such as higher management fees and greater foreign interest, all at the expense of the U.S. Treasury. Rebecca J. Wilkins, a tax policy expert with Citizens for Tax Justice, said the federal government loses an estimated $100 billion a year because of tax havens.

Christian Science Monitor, ABC News

{ 37 comments }

When politicians are campaigning, some try to reinforce the idea that they are similar to most Americans. Candidates for President of the United States try to avoid being labeled as elitist, because some sort of connection and kinship with their constituency is important for winning the favor of voters who aren’t already entrenched with a Democrat or Republican ideology.

Of course, the attempt to be viewed as an “average American” is nothing more than marketing and public relations. In order to find one’s way into the political arena at that level, you need to carry something that sets you aside from most Americans. And while money doesn’t guarantee a victory, it doesn’t hurt.

CNN has reported the net worth and income of the Republican presidential candidates as well as President Obama to see how they compare with each other. Like most Americans, they generally have wealth tied into their homes, but their investments, and in some cases, major liabilities and use of blind trusts, show that this crew lives in a world unfamiliar to most Americans.

Mitt RomneyMitt Romney’s net worth is between $85 million and $264 million. This is a wide range; with lenient reporting requirements, it’s difficult to be specific. He earns most from dividends and interest on his investments as well as from speaking engagements. Romney includes horses and gold among his investments. According to the Federal Election Commission, Mitt Romney has raised $32 million for his campaign as of September 2011 (the latest data).

Jon Huntsman’s net worth is between $16 million and $72 million. CNN points out that Huntsman’s father is one of the richest men in the world, as has donated more than $1 billion to universities and medical research. Huntsman has raised $4.5 million for his campaign as of September 2011.

Newt Gingrich’s net worth is between $7 million and $31 million. Last year, Gingrich earned $2.4 million from his own company, Gingrich Productions, and most of his assets are tied to this company. He also has listed up to $1 million in liabilities in the form of a line of credit with Tiffany and Co. Gingrich has raised $2.9 million for his campaign as of September 2011.

Barack Obama’s net worth is between $2.8 million and $11.8 million. Thanks to sales of his books, Obama can count himself among the richest politicians. He also earns a $400,000 salary as President. Obama has raised $88 million for his re-election campaign as of September 2011.

Ron Paul’s net worth is between $2.4 million and $5.4 million. This includes a five-year personal bank loan of up to $500,000. As a fan of gold, Paul has major investments in companies involved with gold and silver mining. Paul has raised almost $13 million for his campaign as of September 2011.

Rick Santorum’s net worth is between $1 million and $3 million. Santorum’s wealth is in rental real estate properties. He also has mortgages comprising debt of up to $750,000 on properties with a value of up to $1.25 million. He earned $1.3 million from January to August 2010 as a contributor on Fox News and from the Ethics and Public Policy Center think tank. Santorum raised $1.3 million for his campaign as of September 2011.

Rick Perry’s net worth is between $1 million and $2.5 million. The “poorest” of all presidential candidates, Perry receives a $133,000 salary as the governor of Texas. He has a diversified portfolio of stock investments. Perry raised $17 million for his campaign as of September 2011.

Should the individual who represents the United States of America domestically and globally be a reflection of American society? Does wealth tie into that equation?

Photo: Maassive
CNN, Federal Election Commission

{ 14 comments }

I used to work for a company in the financial services industry. Another branch of the corporation I worked for is involved with institutional money management. This department manages institutional investments like company retirement plans and pensions. This is a service they provided to other companies of various types, much like Fidelity and Schwab offer 401(k) management and administration to companies. This could be considered an in-house service, so as an employee of the company, my 401(k) plan was managed by this branch of the same company.

You would think that given the company’s standing within the financial industry, the 401(k) plan would include smart investment choices. Unfortunately, most of the funds available are high-priced, actively-managed mutual funds and annuity funds. There is one stock market index fund available, but its expense ratio is significantly higher than those of the low cost index funds found elsewhere. Nevertheless, I wanted to take advantage of the company’s matching contribution — after all, that’s free money — as well as the tax savings, so I relented and participated in the plan.

401(k) plans — and 403(b) plans available to non-profit and educational organizations — suffer from poor investment choices. They are often significantly more expensive than the index funds you can find for IRAs. A fund’s expenses play a significant role in an investor’s ability to grow wealth over time. A low-cost fund could save an investor over a hundred thousand dollars over the course of a career when compared to a similar fund with above-average expenses. Even taking inflation into account, this will be a significant amount of money.

Schwab has announced that they are now offering a selection of new 401(k) investment choices designed to cater to investors who are keen on keeping more of their money in a program called Schwab Index Advantage. It isn’t clear from the announcement whether the available funds will match what’s currently available to retail investors, but if they aren’t the same funds, they should be similar in cost. The Schwab S&P 500 Index Fund has an expense ratio of 0.09%, lower than even Vanguard’s competing retail S&P 500 Index Fund with 0.17%.

The brokerage also offers companies the ability to provide employees with investment advice and planning tools for an unspecified low cost. The GuidedChoice system will help employees make ongoing decisions regarding their retirement investing, and this should help employees save more for retirement. It’s individualized advice, which isn’t common with retirement plans. Most employees are lucky if their retirement plan comes with a web application that helps them determine an asset allocation strategy; individualized advice could, if the advice is good, help investors grow their nest eggs in a way that’s most appropriate for their goals.

Are you satisfied with your 401(k) retirement plan, its choices, and its included advice?

Charles Schwab

{ 10 comments }

Good Debt and Bad Debt

by Flexo
See-saw

Misuse of credit can destroy a family’s financial life. A household can crumble under the weight of debt, whether it has increased from a poor house-purchasing decision, a drastic change in the real estate market, a shopping addiction, an unexpected medical bill, or the lack of preparedness for an emergency. It’s no surprise people consider ... Continue reading this article…

16 comments Read the full article →

How to Love Cooking

by Forest
Toast

This is a guest post by Forest from Frugal Zeitgeist. Forest writes about frugality, finance, minimalism and lifestyle. In this article, Forest shares his experiences in the kitchen. Cooking great meals is a great way to save money and stay healthy, but it’s a skill that I haven’t developed for myself. Passion can boost motivation, ... Continue reading this article…

44 comments Read the full article →

The Best Credit Cards 2012

by Flexo

If you follow credit card offers like I do, you might have noticed that this past year was particularly exciting. Credit card issuers have been heavily marketing products in search of customers, spending more advertising dollars per customer than they have in recent years, and increasing rewards for the best customers. For individuals who have ... Continue reading this article…

11 comments Read the full article →

Chase Freedom Review and Comparison

by Flexo

From a branding perspective, each credit card issuer looks to group similar offers with a catchy name, helping consumers to immediately identify a type of credit card with the associated benefits. Chase offers quite a few slightly different cards under the Chase Freedom banner, and while the core features are the same, the offers differ ... Continue reading this article…

6 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 1512345···Last »