Most brokerage firms these days have free trades (Charles Schwab started it, then they bought TD Ameritrade), then Fidelity, Ally, E-trade, Merrill Edge, and others followed suit.

It's important to stay current on these topics before posting about them.

The absence was nice while it lasted.

On topic: my wealth manager handles my trades.

@shoptastic wrote:

@Tarantado wrote:

@SoCalMama wrote:

That doesn’t happen in a jar on the counter.

Oh, I really am dense, as another poster called me. I thought the jar on the counter was a metaphor for a Roth IRA shielding the money in the jar from the tax man!

You two know what the answer is.

I assume SoCalMama has had plenty of opportunity to read through the thread and know we're talking about investing (and saving money).

Contribute something positive or leave those of us here to learn, motivate, and discuss alone!

Perhaps you should move on?

Lol wooaaaaaah! Wtf did I do?! If I read the comments correctly, was I REALLY just called a troll? C’mon guys

It doesn't take much to become the target of histrionic behavior concerning imagined slights.

@shoptastic wrote:

Speaking of monthly contributions, I'm not sure if I have a good "rule of thumb" for buying and selling ratios in relation to fees. This is not relevant for those with free trading accounts.

But, for those who use brokerages that charge a fee whenever you buy and sell (I usually see between $4 to $7 for most of the "big" online discount brokerages like Vanguard, Fidelity, etc.), is your rule to buy and/or sell at a 1% ratio of fees?

In other words, if the brokerage charges $4 to buy or sell a stock/fund, do you buy/sell a MINIMUM of $400 worth each time so that the fee is no more than 1%?

I remember reading a Motley Fool article (or what is it a video?) a year or so ago, where they talked about good rules of thumbs to have. I vaguely remember (don't recall all the details) something like a 1% rule, so you don't "lose" that much every time you buy/sell.

Obviously, if it costs $4 to trade at a brokerage, you'd not want to buy, say, 10 shares of a $4 stock for $40. You're losing 10% immediately. But, then, what rule of thumb DO YOU use?

(1) Get a high paying job that allows you to save a lot of money
(1.5) Start a business, buy investment real estate etc, if this is your thing
(2) Buy the market using Vanguard's mutual fund VTSMX, go crazy and diversify into some international, if you want to do that
(3) Keep the above and don't sell
(4) What fees?
(5) Keep a % in a high yield savings account for an emergency fund/car, house, etc
(6) Balance your portfolio between stocks and bonds based on your age and risk tolerance
(7) Wait
(8) Million dollars, might take a few decades, or not, depending on #1

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/23/2019 07:38AM by Niner.

@Niner wrote:

(1) Get a high paying job that allows you to save a lot of money
(1.5) Start a business, buy investment real estate etc, if this is your thing
(2) Buy the market using Vanguard's mutual fund VTSMX, go crazy and diversify into some international, if you want to do that
(3) Keep the above and don't sell
(4) What fees?
(5) Keep a % in a high yield savings account for an emergency fund/car, house, etc
(6) Balance your portfolio between stocks and bonds based on your age and risk tolerance
(7) Wait
(8) Million dollars, might take a few decades, or not, depending on #1

BINGO.

@Niner wrote:

(1) Get a high paying job that allows you to save a lot of money
(1.5) Start a business, buy investment real estate etc, if this is your thing
(2) Buy the market using Vanguard's mutual fund VTSMX, go crazy and diversify into some international, if you want to do that
(3) Keep the above and don't sell
(4) What fees?
(5) Keep a % in a high yield savings account for an emergency fund/car, house, etc
(6) Balance your portfolio between stocks and bonds based on your age and risk tolerance
(7) Wait
(8) Million dollars, might take a few decades, or not, depending on #1

Yeah, that's a decent outline for investing in general, Niner.

I'd probably change and add a few things here and there, but that's maybe a good topic of convo. for another time. I think one biggie is having an emergency fund in place first. For me, I've cheated that somewhat. I do have a few thousand in savings (ehhh...maybe less now, due to draining it), but nowhere near the fully recommended 3-6 mos. of expenses. Due to unique circumstances, I can "afford" to cheat that "step," but would NOT recommend others (w/o good reason) to do so, as it's a very important component to an investing plan, since you don't want to have to sell stocks at an inopportune time if you suddenly lose your job and need the income.

In terms of my post, I was actually asking more specifically about stock/fund share(s) to trading fee ratios. Not sure if that question came across correctly.

I actually Googled around for a while and found Motley Fool's discussion of the topic again. Their recommendation is to try to keep to a 2% rule - never have the trading fee be more than 2% of your stock/fund share/s purchase. But, they then say 1% is really the better rule. 2% is already probably too much to give up.

So, if your trading fee is $5 (hypothetical), then the minimum stock/fund purchase you make should be $500. I think I've heard different "exceptions" before like if the stock is deemed extremely undervalued, then a ratio leading to higher than 1% fees may be okay. And, of course, if you're selling a stock that is literally going to go out of business (Lehman Brothers or Bear Stearns in 2007-2008), then any ratio is fine, etc. etc. There are some exceptions and that was the gist of my question....what "rule" do you use for purchases, given trading fees?

@Tarantado wrote:

Lol wooaaaaaah! Wtf did I do?! If I read the comments correctly, was I REALLY just called a troll? C’mon guys

No. SoCalMama.

*sorry, you were lumped in for context of comments*

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/23/2019 12:18PM by shoptastic.

"In terms of my post, I was actually asking more specifically about stock/fund share(s) to trading fee ratios. grinning smiley Not sure if that question came across correctly."

I thought I had mentioned this, but don't pay fees. They eat heavily into your return. Mutual funds are a good way to avoid the fees. You should not be trading individual funds anyway. I do it a bit for fun, and beat the market, but never more than I could afford to lose. I keep the majority of the my stock money in the Total Market Fund, with some in a RIT fund and very little in an international fund.

"Due to unique circumstances, I can "afford" to cheat that "step," but would NOT recommend others"

What could possibly be these unique circumstances?!?

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/23/2019 01:12PM by Niner.

@bgriffin wrote:

@JASFLALMT wrote:

You are saying that there are 10-15 posters that an overwhelming MAJORITY of forum members have PMed you about? Riiiiiiight. Please go ahead and name these forum members that the majority of forum members have been PMing you about, and tell us how many forum members have PMed you. I call BS!!!

@shoptastic wrote:

I've mentioned it several times before (i.e., "a group of 10-15 posters who the overwhelming majority of forum members here dislike and have voiced opposition to in PMs" and will address it in another thread.

I apologize.

Me me me me!!!!!!!!!!

*****DISCLAIMER***** - JAS, please take this as someone who is not against you right now, nor interested in fighting or causing more issues than already done. I regret making those comments. I was hurt by people liking comments that I felt were meant to troll me. I feel certain people always tend to like comments aimed against me and never like anything I post. And I think there's been bad history between us. I also feel I am the one always having to doing the "lifting" to make things right, apologize for when I feel I'm wrong, and be the bigger person. I feel others never do the same for me. That's some context. I blurted out what I did out of anger. If I could take it back, I would, because I know it's going to inevitably cause trouble. Because it's already out there, I think I can address it to some degree to try to bring closure for the good. But, I'm going to try not to inflame the mistaken outburst anymore than I already have in saying it to begin with.

You're right. There are not 10-15 people, as the list is closer to 8-10. I started using 10-15 as a rough estimate in the past and have said it multiple times (including to moderators in private) and just stuck with that number. I purposely put quotes around my comments to indicate I was just quoting my prior self (roughly) and was going to start a separate thread in the MetaForum/Community Area to address this (although, now it may just be here).

I won't reveal the individuals who have PM'd me (this started a couple of years ago through very recently), due to privacy reasons and some depending on MS-ing for their income (one of the reasons why some people don't speak out). But, I've also deleted (and encouraged the other sides to do so as well) some messages, specifically, in part because I've also been warned that one or more of those who've publicly messed with me is a likely moderator. I don't know what PM reading privileges moderators have and take precautions to limit certain discussions (sometimes deleting some - although, that's been in cases usually where sensitive things have been said that could harm a person's livelihood).

As for the "overwhelming majority" part, that was speculation amongst some of us (not a fact). We believe there are more of us than there are of the 8-10 posters (and those who take their side), who have ***previously been seen*** as rude, bullying, jerks, etc. But, I was not saying that literally hundreds or thousands of posters have PM'd me. The total, still, is significant and ranges from relatively new forum members (1-3 years) to people who've been here and/or in ms-ing 5+ (possibly a decade in some cases, as "sign-up" dates don't measure full years in the industry) years.

Other posters besides myself have publicly remarked on this phenomenon previously. And, I think we were wrong to do so. I ultimately feel it's stooping to a low level in some ways, because it's passive aggressive perhaps (as you put it to describe me above). I think we could have encouraged each other to just report such individuals, ignore them, chatted amongst ourselves on ways of dealing with such people, tried to work things out formally (individually or as a group), or any number of other things rather than just saying something like what I did.

One thing I will say is that I have lost patience at times when people do the same disliked/annoying/rude things over and over and over and over on this forum. Someone recently made a remark to the effect that I had not learned something after being told in the past (completely fair point and a more complicated, unrelated topic) and my thought was how many times do I have to tell others to watch their words, don't be rude, don't be condescending, don't subordinate other people (treat them like a friend/equal rather than someone to talk down to or lecture), etc.

I want to make peace. And I also think many have improved (which is why I starred this part above: "***previously been seen***" ). I've even remarked to several posters in private that Irene has really gotten better.

******SORRY, Irene, if that felt like a call-out!!! I'm am NOT saying that to put you down, but to say that you genuinely have improved!!!! I know there's no way to say it really other than to first point out a negative.

I'm not a perfect person and probably have all sorts of annoying habits and traits. I think many of you HAVE taken some of what people have complained about to heart and shown changes. It's possible these are weak areas you all deal with (just as I and everyone else have their own), but unless there is genuine internal acknowledgement of these issues in one's heart and a kind of "repentance" and desire to never do it again, I believe the same behaviors and attitudes will resurface.

So, what do people dislike and how have people dealt with things?:

I'll start with the second part first. One important part of life is differentiating between people you respect for their values and people's knowledge that you respect. There are many smart, experienced, and knowledgeable posters on this forum. However, having that expertise does not give one any entitlement to "abuse" others by talking down to them or being rude.

I might respect a person's knowledge and listen and even utilize it. But, if they are scumbags, I wouldn't respect them as a person and wouldn't be their friend. This is someone I would never hang out with, call at night to chat or if I were in need of something, or try to develop any kind of personal relationship with outside of formalities. Some people take that route here. They will "use" the experts (who sometimes show atrocious interpersonal skills) for their knowledge, but never interact with them outside of that on a personal level, nor respect that person.

I mean, do you really want that or people to think of you in that way? Not everyone will "fight" you on a forum and may be civil (as we should), but they personally dislike you. Does anyone really want that? I know I wouldn't! And I don't think you or others truly would either. And, this is where understanding what makes many people feel this way can lead to positive changes. But, it does require first acknowledging the issue in one's heart and taking steps to fix it.

I guarantee I'd stand up for you or anyone else who has done this. People can and do change! I would encourage others (privately) to do so as well and to embrace you all (and have done so with Irene, as mentioned above). That end result would be awesome for the forum: a unified, friendly, encouraging, engaging, respectful, and tight group.

But, that brings me to the issue(s) at hand: What upsets people about a small group of posters who have these characteristics?

1.) Any personal attacks against others. This would include mocking people and "messing" with others the way some of you have done to me. You know the threads in question. These were threads designed specifically to put me down with no other purpose. Several of them existed in the past and I was never once given a personal apology by anyone (that I know of). But, this is more of an extreme and rare - personal attacks that is. I think passive aggressive attacks and mocking are more common. Being snide, showing rude snarkiness, and the like are often more common. Many of you have done that with me with little jabbing comments here and there and I have not liked that.

Yet, make no mistake, all of this behavior is horrendous - from full on personal attacks to subtle ones.

2.) A condescending, rude, subordinating, and lecturing kind of tone. I don't know if people realize they're doing it, but it's noticed by those who are on the receiving end and those who just generally dislike this behavior. When speaking to a fellow forum member, there is no need to sort of "subordinate" them and treat them like they are a child to be lectured to. It's often about tone. Make your point as an offering up of knowledge to aid someone. Don't condescend or talk down to someone.

And IF you MUST criticize, do it constructively. I've previously mentioned the "sandwich" method by Steven K. Scott (taken from his book, The Richest Man Who Ever Lived) that some forum members really liked in the past. I'll it repeat here (it's conceptually modeled after a sandwich):

1.) THE TOP LAYER OF BREAD: Start with something positive (such as a compliment of the person or something they've done right). This helps the person understand you are on their side and trying to offer constructive criticism. And the positive comments up front disarm/soften them up for the "meat" (i.e., the criticism).

2.) MEAT - DELIVER THE CRITICISM: Make it short and only say what is needed (don't rub it in, dwell too long on it, etc.) I'd have to look this up, but I believe Steven K. Scott also says only offer up ONE criticism at a time with the sandwich approach. I think this may be part of the method, but don't 100% recall. For sure, the criticism comes in between the two positives, however.

3.) THE BOTTOM LAYER OF BREAD: End with a positive comment. After you deliver constructive criticism, then finish with something nice/positive/encouraging, etc. This buffers the harshness of the critique and again reassures the person you care about them and are on their side. This will help them accept the criticism.

Steven K. Scott has said in decades of doing business, he's never once seen this method fail when he's employed it. Every single time he's used the sandwich method, the person has genuinely taken in the criticism.

For reference, Scott is a multi-millionaire businessman, who has held (possibly still holds) the direct-marketing industry record for sales success rate. Direct marketing is when you see those infomercials on late night TV or a shopping channel. They usually have 30 seconds or so to pitch you an idea. It's very tough. Time is short and most people fail. Yet, he had something like a 63% batting average and his ads led to billions of dollars in product sales, including: The Total Gym (yup, that Chuck Norris commercial was written and directed by him); Lori Davis hair care products, and various medical and acne products. Lots of his informercials were famous mega-hits and he's often said his greatest skill was communication. The "sandwich method" is from a chapter in, The Richest Man Who Ever Lived, which is a book on wisdom for business and life.

3.) Try to listen to people and understand things from their perspective. Don't assume things. Ask questions if you're not sure of something. Don't get aggressive if someone has a different point of view or a different personality or communication style than your own. Don't impose yourself.

4.) If someone says something is offensive. Take it seriously. Don't first try to justify your behavior and tell them they are wrong. Take seriously that what you have said and/or our tone is hurtful to that person or offensive in some way and try to speak in a different way if possible (sometimes it may not be).

5.) Be fair. Don't nit pick certain people or talk to certain people only in a critical way, but not do it with others.

(continued below):

Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 12/23/2019 03:41PM by shoptastic.

Please take your own advice. SoCalMama had a good point that you cant become a millionaire with just a jar on the counter. Take it for what it is.

@shoptastic wrote:

Contribute something positive or leave those of us here to learn, motivate, and discuss alone!

*sorry, double post*

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/23/2019 03:21PM by shoptastic.

I edited some important things in the above post (if you want to re-read). I split it up to avoid an overly long single post.

To continue: If you take the above things to heart and show true change, as I've said, I'd be the first to stand up for you (as I already have privately for some). I used to struggle with a bitter heart and unforgiveness at times.
But, that goes against my faith and is ultimately also a horrible way to think and be. I wouldn't want that and want to like and have good relations with you all.

***When I use the word "you," it's not in reference to a single or particular person, but just everyone on that "list."

I can say that many people feel these things, but have not publicly said them.

a.) Like me, some have sometimes taken a higher ground and just tried to ignore or report.

b.) Some need ms-ing as their primary income and do not want to get into public confrontation.

c.) One person has been so hurt by bullying, this person has taken extreme steps (I won't disclose the sensitive nature of this person's situation, but it speaks volumes to me of how some people perceive you all).

Ultimately, I, myself, will start to permanently block people (with or without notice) if things continue. But, my hope is that we can co-exist in peaceful and positive harmony here.

Look, stating that you feel you are a bigger person than other people in this forum is not a great way to smooth things over.

I never asked you to name the people who PMed you. I asked you to name the 10-15 (okay 8-10, still seems high) forum members you are being PMed ABOUT. If I am included in this group, I sure would like to know. Bgriffin and Irene managed to read my post clearly and felt as if they might be included in this number. Why don't you let us know which of us are being singled out as disliked by the majority of the forum members? I think everyone would be very interested to know.

@shoptastic wrote:

I also feel I am the one always having to doing the "lifting" to make things right, apologize for when I feel I'm wrong, and be the bigger person.
(continued below):

Duplicate

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/23/2019 03:55PM by JASFLALMT.

And I just want to reiterate that putting people on a "list" and stating that you take a "higher ground" shows you have feelings of grandiose superiority and I am sure I am not the only one who notices that. And while I have never claimed to be a Christian, I know plenty of people who truly are and none of them would EVER say some of the stuff you post in here. SMH.

@shoptastic wrote:

But, that goes against my faith and is ultimately also a horrible way to think and be. I wouldn't want that and want to like and have good relations with you all.

***When I use the word "you," it's not in reference to a single or particular person, but just everyone on that "list."

I can say that many people feel these things, but have not publicly said them.

a.) Like me, some have sometimes taken a higher ground and just tried to ignore or report.

I condensed the most judgmental and hypocritical statements you made above for you to reflect on. You think calling people scumbags isn't rude, condescending, and judgmental? You don't think that many of your posts come off as condescending and with a lecturing kind of tone? Unbelievable.

@shoptastic wrote:

... my thought was how many times do I have to tell others to watch their words, don't be rude, don't be condescending, don't subordinate other people (treat them like a friend/equal rather than someone to talk down to or lecture), etc.

I might respect a person's knowledge and listen and even utilize it. But, if they are scumbags, I wouldn't respect them as a person and wouldn't be their friend.

2.) A condescending, rude, subordinating, and lecturing kind of tone. I don't know if people realize they're doing it, but it's noticed by those who are on the receiving end and those who just generally dislike this behavior. When speaking to a fellow forum member, there is no need to sort of "subordinate" them and treat them like they are a child to be lectured to. It's often about tone. Make your point as an offering up of knowledge to aid someone. Don't condescend or talk down to someone.

4.) If someone says something is offensive. Take it seriously. Don't first try to justify your behavior and tell them they are wrong. Take seriously that what you have said and/or our tone is hurtful to that person or offensive in some way and try to speak in a different way if possible (sometimes it may not be).
:

So this long thread started with a reference to Dave Ramsey and his ideas for achieving his idea of millionaire status.

So this long thread started with a reference to Dave Ramsey and his ideas for achieving his idea of millionaire status.

@JASFLALMT wrote:

Most brokerage firms these days have free trades (Charles Schwab started it, then they bought TD Ameritrade), then Fidelity, Ally, E-trade, Merrill Edge, and others followed suit.

It's important to stay current on these topics before posting about them.

I do follow (read Bloomberg, CNBC, etc. every day) and was aware of the exact day and chronology of free trades starting with Schwab - it was a big deal, but my primary brokerage is Vanguard ($7 trades), JAS, so that is my main reference.

I've previously mentioned free trades before, so figured everyone knew about them.

One thing for people to keep in mind just starting out is that free trades are online only usually (unless I'm mistaken). Phone trades still are charged fees.

@JASFLALMT wrote:

I condensed the most judgmental and hypocritical statements you made above for you to reflect on. You think calling people scumbags isn't rude, condescending, and judgmental? You don't think that many of your posts come off as condescending and with a lecturing kind of tone? Unbelievable.

I initially worried about using the word "scumbags," but I believe it was an okay usage given the context. Note that I'm not calling a regular behaving person a scumbag. Rather, I'm saying that if you are the type of person to mock others in the way people did to me - creating threads specifically for that purpose and not taking me seriously when I asked you to stop and said it was hurtful - then you rightfully are called a scumbag for that behavior. Similarly, those who abuse newbies (and even non-newbies) with condescension and rudeness when answering forum questions and consistently refuse to take criticism from numerous forum members saying this is not cool are also rightly admonished.

It's not saying someone is a scumbag (who acts in offensive ways) that is wrong, hypocritical, or offensive. It's the behaviors and attitudes that led to that label that are deserving of the word.

JAS - if I'm guilty of that, I'd be open to being shown it and corrected. I don't believe I take that tone when answering forum questions and giving advice to people on ms-ing. I have NEVER once (people can try to find an example) talked down to someone, subordinated them, lectured them like a child, etc. when helping people with ms questions.

If I sound like I'm doing something like that now, note it's in condemning forum behavior from people who have acted poorly in the past (and present). That's warranted! What's not warranted is a poor poster - often a newbie - getting scolded or spoken to rudely in the name of "helping" that person understand something. I'm not the first to bring this up. Many people have said this is a rampant forum problem in the past. Yet, a small select few of you don't take heed.

I can say you've previously been more cordial to me and I've noticed it. I tried to do the same with you. But, you can go off one people too (johnb?) in ways I personally never would or disagree with. Many of the people who've been labeled in these ways have actually changed a little bit for the better. I can sincerely say that.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/23/2019 07:08PM by shoptastic.

@JASFLALMT wrote:

And I just want to reiterate that putting people on a "list" and stating that you take a "higher ground" shows you have feelings of grandiose superiority and I am sure I am not the only one who notices that. And while I have never claimed to be a Christian, I know plenty of people who truly are and none of them would EVER say some of the stuff you post in here. SMH.

I regret using the word "list" or even saying what I first started off saying (which prompted this discussion). I don't entirely disagree with you. I was typing a long post and tired and lost some ability to word it better, JAS.

*sigh* I wish I had used a different phrasing/wording. This isn't about being on a higher ground. I'd bet I'm a much more flawed person than many people here and around me.

I do know that I'm probably the only person who has taken the time and done a lot of the work to confront these issues. And I have done the heavy lifting much of the time to say where I've been wrong, tried to get people to see their faults, and tried to ask for peaceful resolution. At some point, I get the feeling, JAS, that you may not accept any way that I would word things. I feel a lot of what I said was justified in those words/tone and that ultimately you may just not be open to rebuke. Or, am I wrong (genuinely asking and not intending any confrontational tone)?

If you (or others) are wrong and someone rebukes you, then by nature that will not be pleasant on some level. And it will naturally place me on a "higher ground" at the specific and temporary time of the rebuke. But, again, that is inherent to rebuke and not me wanting to purposely subordinate you or anyone. I'm just as flawed as anyone else - if not much more - so I've taken my lumps when deserved and tried to make peace with people. Part of this requires a recognition on the part of the small select few, who engage in those aforementioned behaviors, to take personal responsibility.

As for a list, that was probably a horrible way to word it, as it makes it seem like people are actively sitting there and pinning people to it perhaps with like a hateful heart. *again, my wording maybe isn't the best, but hoping hou get the drift, as I'm tiring at the moment* It was just supposed to say that there are some people frequently mentioned "behind closed doors" as engaging in objectionable behavior and that many have been offended by and want ignore/report/etc. I don't wish I ever brought this topic up. I let it burst out of anger. Regretful as it is, I am commenting only because it's already been mentioned.

I do think, ultimately, what matters is if people heed these complaints. If you do, then harmony can be had going forward.

*****made some edits above*****

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 12/23/2019 07:34PM by shoptastic.

It's the constant attempt to rationalize instead of just letting things go that bugs me. When the mods reinstated you after the last time, you wanted to explain and rationalize to me about previous negative rants, and i told you to move on. I'm telling you the same thing. Quit with the name cslling and taking offense to everything. You get pissy about tone when you have no idea what someone's tone is, you can't see their face or hear their voice to truly know. Instead of taking everything at it's worst and twisting things around, just let it go already!

Typing on phone

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/23/2019 07:39PM by JASFLALMT.