The fact that it isn’t enough to eliminate your children’s mortgages is telling enough to me
Somethings just aren’t worth hanging onto
Glad to hear you’re punting it to someone else, best of luck to them
Thanks to the extreme climates I think farming is becoming less and less viable. Hopefully the climate trends will improve over time
It’s land, which has max (productive value, scarcity value). If its not near a city or vacation destination, its only going to go up with inflation and farming productiviy gains.
Not necessarily, see Oklahoma 1930s.
The agriculture sector in Canada and Russia is expected to benefit more from warming than in more southerly countries. The growing season in the northern climates will lengthen but not be too hot and the area being farmed will expand according to various studies. Farming in areas with already very hot summers is much more at risk.
It is disconcerting that the proceeds of our lovely farm will not buy a one bedroom condo in Vancouver.
Oh, that was poorly worded. It was meant to suggest a cap on value, not a guarantee, but I agree there are many ways value can also be destroyed.
On a different topic…I have a friend who is…
Do you have any insights/advice as to how he should allocate his (vanguard) investments?
I don’t see any fundamental issue with that asset allocation, but I would like to see more opinions and discussions on asset allocations here.
Vanguard gets double thumbs up from me:
14% in bonds does not seem high or low given age & asset tolerance.
I might suggest adding some international stock index or two for diversification. Also some REITS?
Take the 86% in stocks and move toward
50% Large Cap (and VG admiral shares are a better than great choice here)
10% Small and Mid cap
16% International
10% REIT
I would start diversifying away from such high USD exposures.
Quite a lot of analysis is being done now in relation to equity returns likely being lower over the next 10-20 years due to the high valuations found in the US right now.
So having overseas equities makes sense in this context.
Either 80:20 or 70:30 [US:Overseas] seems reasonable to me.
I recently found out about a tax rule that I didn’t know about.
Within a rollover, pre-tax IRA I have stock for a company that I worked for years ago. The stock has appreciated nicely.
I was under the assumption that every dollar I take out of that IRA will be taxed at my ordinary tax rate at the time of the withdrawal.
But I found out that the appreciation on the stock in the IRA is only taxed at the capital gains rate, not the ordinary rate. That will save me some bucks.
I had thought of diversifying away my concentration of that stock within my IRA, as I won’t need that cash for 10 years or more, but I would lose that tax beni if I sell it within the IRA.
Did you guys know this?
OK, very interesting. I said 16% international, and Polymath is agreeing with the concept but suggesting 20% to 30%. This is a good discussion, and I am interested in the arithmetic mean of other people’s opinions on the international allocation, as I am open to raising my pick.
In the US, I personally use index matching ETFs for US equities for their low expense and efficiency.
It’s not so cut and dried for international picks. What are some vehicles that are good to use to invest internationally?
I did not know this but it makes sense
I’d diversify your position
I need to take my own advice…
Yeah, what percent of net worth do you think is uncomfortably high for a single stock?
I am not exactly concerned about the concentration, in this case, of a single stock, but I own stock from other companies that I have worked for that are all P&C insurers, so I have asset concentration in a single (cat prone) industry that is starting to trigger my spidey-senses.
I went to vanguard to check out their international funds. They have a quote there “…suggest at least 20% [in international stocks/bonds]”.
Take that fwiw.
Well, I’m a big fan of vanguard/index funds so I’ll be considering their “total international stock/bond index fund
I’d say it depends on whether your stock concentration is with a company that currently employs you. If your current employer becomes financially distressed down the road, it’s potentially a double dip: investment tanking at the same time your job becomes at risk.
Ideally just a few percent (I’m thinking 2-3%, something where I wouldn’t care if they just declared chapter 11 overnight)
Personally I worked at United for 5 years and accumulated over 6 figures in company stock. I never sold a single share. Now that I’m retired these company stocks are going to be the first thing out the door once my severance money runs out
All other health companies I worked for were non profits or not for profit types (blue cross/shield types)
Here is the sort of logic you are looking for in these types of international investments.
Investors grab European equities to gain cheap US exposure - Investors grab European equities to gain cheap US exposure via @FT
At least in Canada, there are a few well diversified international and emerging market ETFs you can buy.
Canadian investors probably look at and hold international equity funds more than American investors because of our small domestic equities market.
I can see up to 50% international for a US investor. If you are in a smaller market, I feel that exposure to other countries is really essential. Vanguard has been recommending 40%.
OTH the Mega-cap US companies are all multinational so you could argue that investing in GOOG, APPL, AMZN etc gives you the exposure that you need.
Myself, I feel that the US dollar winning streak needs to take a pause eventually and at that point companies domiciled in other countries like ASML, MELI, TSM etc. will experience outperformance from currency appreciation. Of course, currency appreciation is little help if you’re invested in poorly performing companies.