I didn’t write this comment for investing at your level. This is investing for people who want to have a retirement and aren’t interested in stock investing as a job, because to correctly monitor markets and companies and successfully pick winners requires education and a time investment. I’ve done my fair share of picking winners out of companies that become movers, but I don’t have the risk tolerance for that anymore and this forum isn’t the place to teach people all of that. Because something works and requires minimum effort doesn’t make it rudimentary, that’s completely unfair, derogatory, and insinuates people should try more risky strategies. You completely missed the audience I wrote the comment for. Anyone at your skill and risk level doesn’t need this advice. The equivalent of me suggesting one buy a reliable Honda and here you jump in suggesting a Maserati. Not the same crowd.

There’s no reason you can’t do both. This country had proven time and a gain it will put rich people first, the rich get rich because investments and holdings in stocks, so taking advantage of the shitty situation is fair game.

Yeah, I got the joke. I was talking about the inspiration for the joke that made it funny in the first place.

Ah, sorry didn’t see the name change. No, that was never my intent. Diversification is a must.

I’m not continuing this discussion to change your mind. If you’re happy with what you’ve got you’ve no need to listen to me. Big consumer investment houses are there to make money off you. Everything you listed is exactly what I mentioned as being a reduction in your ROI and incurring fees and taxes. For instance, we’ve invested in QQQ (feel free to check it) for more than a decade using the strategy I mentioned first. Even over the last 5 years it’s had 110% return. $10k is now more than $20k without bothering to calculate DCA or returns investing. Now do that across more index funds. Even if averages 7% with gains/losses and no fees or capital gains you can see that this comes out far ahead.

All that said, good luck.

IRAs are tied to stocks.

There’s no way to “avoid the stock market entirely” using this. Yes, you should balance how you want your tax burden to look in the future by deciding how you wish to invest in Roth or regular IRA. IRAs are also limited to how much you can contribute, whereas traditional stock investment does not.

I don’t want to get too deep in the weeds here for investing strategy. There’s pros, cons, and costs to each of these kinds of investment. People have to look at all of these, their personal capabilities, and risk tolerance. Personally, we’re (another key word here:) diversified across multiple investments and someone absolutely should take advantage of the same if they can.

False inductive reasoning combined with butwhataboutism and sealinoning. All designed to exhaust the opponent and muddy the argument. Conservatives love this form of argument.

Actually just avoid the stock market entirely and pay someone else to manage your money.

This doesn’t make sense?

If someone is “managing” your money, they’re managing stocks and/or investments tied to stocks, even if it’s something like a direct deposit to a CMA.

High interest savings is pretty decent if you can find the right one, it’s a no-effort way to collect interest. Just make sure you can afford the bank’s rules like minimum amounts or any fees.

As far as someone else managing your money you left out a lot. Who and how? Money managers take fees one way or the other, they trade your money around based on whatever works for the business and not always what is best for the client. No matter what any trades will incur trade fees and capital gains taxes. Those gains and fees are losses that could have been avoided. I’ll stand by my original opinion.

Yea. All of us except the Natives, and even then if you want to be even more pedantic they migrated here too.

I want all the names. Not just trump.

Yeah. Himself.

Index funds. Avoid individual stocks. Don’t try to time the market, in or out. DCA. Don’t touch the money. Don’t touch the money. Don’t touch the money.

Pretty much all you need to know right there - assuming the market continues in some fashion we’re accustomed to.

Why did you change the subject plastics when the discussion is about climate issues? why should we ignore it? How about the ocean life destroying trash gyres? Sea- and bird-life choking plastics? Microplastics with as-yet not fully understood fallout? Chemicals from plastics and their manufacture leaking into water supplies?

Plastics are a generally a petroleum product, so regardless of whether the product from those drilling rigs makes plastic bottle tops or bunker fuel, it’s killing or hurting something for our convenience.

Wong. An immigrant, or at least the descendant of. They’re so quick to pull up the ladder.

The big difference is that dems would expect anyone in the files that is guilty of crimes would be prosecuted correctly, and republicans would expect everyone except them to be prosecuted.

Proof?

Everything will be Boaty McBoatface.

The dude could literally have the hangman’s noose of judgement around his neck and still be ranting and blaming everyone but himself. He cannot operate any other way. It’s pathological.

They’re only mad because they want to see if any Democrats are on the list.