FREE NEWSLETTER

Misery lies in the mismatch between the decades needed to score fabulous gains in the stock market—and investors’ relentless focus on today.

Latest PostsAll Discussions »

Investing

Financial Ruin for Beginners

Mark Crothers  |  Oct 6, 2026

"Brah! You're so naive! Crypto baby! All you need to know. To the moon!"
- bbbobbins
Read more »

Investing

Rich or Wealthy?

R Quinn  |  Oct 5, 2026

"Sure there are exceptions. I've huge admiration for Gates for his efforts to microchip everyone through vaccines, be a whatabout him distraction for Trumpites re island activities substantially improve world health, education and equality. Plus the giving pledge. But there are also billionaire/trillionaires who seem to revel in a Dr Evil persona. Of course creating work and wealth for others goes with the job of being a mega entrepreneur. They literally can't do it alone no matter how slick their PR. I don't think you can say sports stars and entertainers don't contribute lasting value. I still remember viscerally Tommy Smith's header in Rome* and I was a young child at the time. You ever heard of a little LP called Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band? Or seen Godfather Part II? Or cried over a book? Plus you can actually measure the economy boost on a city when Beyonce or Taylor Swift is in town. But they do tend to be more demonstrably socially aware. Or just do better PR, who really knows. *IYKYK YNWA"
- bbbobbins
Read more »

Health

Medicare Part D premium shock 2027

R Quinn  |  Sep 29, 2026

"You’re absolutely right. The law was probably written by the insurers. As I said, all FDA approved drugs should be on every formulary. I have many years explaining health benefits to people but trying to cover all the variables individuals face with Part D is ridiculous. The fact people can be at risk for a Rx they weren’t taking at the start of the year is just wrong. The entire structure of competition is working against people."
- R Quinn
Read more »

In Retirement

Is now the time for an annuity?

R Quinn  |  Oct 2, 2026

"My understanding is you can fund a Charitable Gift Annuity (CGA) from either an IRA or after-tax funds. The $55,000 limit applies to an IRA funded CGA. After-tax funded CGAs are very different. I don't think there is a hard limit on after-tax funded CGAs. There may be a limit on how much of an initial tax deduction you can get - limited by your AGI. Fidelity has a good explanation."
- RCC
Read more »

From HumbleDollar Founder Jonathan Clements

Happiness

Let’s Get Happy

AMERICA’S HAPPINESS plunged during the pandemic. I’d assumed that survey result was an aberration, and perhaps that’ll still prove to be the case. But…
Read more »

Investing

Why Bonds Matter

ArticleAdam M. Grossman  |  Oct 3, 2026

RECENTLY, A READER—let’s call him Tom—posed this question: If stocks historically have delivered far better returns than bonds, then why should an investor own any bonds at all? Even with the stock market's unpredictable ups and downs, wouldn't you end up way ahead by betting only on stocks over the long term? It's a fair question. Over the past 100 years, stocks have delivered returns of roughly 10% per year, while bonds have returned just 5%. More recently, that gap has been even wider. Between 2016 and 2025, the S&P 500 gained nearly 15% per year, on average, while bonds gained less than 2%. And as we've experienced in recent years, bonds aren’t without risk, so why not just go all in with a 100% stock portfolio? The most common answer to this question involves a phenomenon known as sequence-of-returns risk. That’s the risk posed to retirees by an unpredictable stock market. Suppose, for example, you retire on a Friday, and stocks drop the following Monday. This would, of course, be unnerving, but it could become a real problem if you’re forced to sell stocks while they’re depressed. Too many forced sales can cause a portfolio to deplete too quickly. Tom, the reader who posed this question, is an experienced investor and well aware of sequence-of-returns risk. His view, though, is that it’s a fear that’s overblown. Even if stocks drop from time to time, he argued, the impact should be modest. That’s because the loss an investor actually experiences in any given year would be limited by the amount withdrawn in that year. Suppose, for example, a retiree is taking withdrawals at a 4% annual rate. Even if the market were to drop 50%, that 50% loss would only be applied to the 4% withdrawal, resulting in a loss of just 2%. And since the stock market has delivered such superior performance overall, Tom asked, shouldn’t that more than offset single-digit losses like this, especially if they occur only every once in a while? It was a good question, so I ran the numbers, starting with a period that was particularly punishing for stock market investors: In 2000, the U.S. market dropped 9%. In 2001, it dropped a further 12%, and in 2002, it dropped yet another 22%. What would’ve happened if you’d retired at the beginning of 2000 with an all-stock portfolio and started taking withdrawals at a rate of 4% per year? In that case, the funds would have run down nearly to zero within 25 years. And if the withdrawal rate had been even just a little higher—4.5% instead of 4%—the funds would’ve been fully depleted within 20 years. Does that mean Tom’s 100%-stock strategy would be inadvisable? The answer is nuanced. Here are some key points to consider: First, it’s important to recognize that a retirement in 2000 was close to a worst-case scenario. Looking at retirement dates over the past 100 years, there were just two other cases in which a portfolio would have deteriorated so quickly over the course of a 25-year retirement. The first, not surprisingly, was 1929. The second was 1969, just before the malaise of the 1970s, when market returns stagnated while inflation accelerated. Aside from those limited cases, an all-stock portfolio would have been a winning strategy in nearly every other time period. In 91% of rolling 25-year periods between 1926 and 2025, a retiree would’ve ended up with more money after 25 years of withdrawals than on the first day of retirement. In about half of 25-year periods, the amount of money in the bank after 25 years would have been five times more than at the beginning of the period. Tom’s all-stock strategy, in other words, would have been the right choice in nearly every case over the past 100 years. Still, I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone approaching retirement, for these five reasons. First, and probably most important, is the fact that we each have only one chance at retirement. If we happen to end up with an unlucky sequence like in 1929, 1969 or 2000, it would be cold comfort to know that we were simply unlucky. As Bill Bernstein likes to point out, the odds of losing at Russian roulette are just one-in-six, but it goes without saying that still none of us would take that risk. Similarly, we can’t know what the future holds, so that’s why I’d recommend an asset allocation that, statistically speaking, might be more conservative than necessary. Another reality is that history is an imperfect guide to the future. In the past, there have been just three very tough periods for new retirees, but there’s no guarantee what path the market will follow in the future. Look no further than Japan, which only recently emerged from a 34-year bear market. Another risk is inflation, which was a key reason why the late-1960s were such a difficult time to retire. The government’s difficulty in reining in inflation since the pandemic is a reminder of this risk. Another consideration: I assumed in my simulation that a retiree’s portfolio withdrawals would follow the popular 4% rule, starting at 4% in the first year of retirement, then increasing in lockstep with inflation. Those assumptions are useful for financial modeling but don’t reflect the way real people spend money, which varies much more from year to year. If I had assumed spending that was even modestly higher than 4%, the failure rate would have been much higher. The last reason I’d be wary of an all-stock portfolio isn’t mathematical at all. It’s the reality that stock market declines can be enormously upsetting. So even if you can theoretically afford to take more risk, that doesn’t mean you’ll be happy when the market inevitably declines at some point—or at multiple points—during retirement. A final note: So far, this discussion has been limited to retirees. If you’re early in your working years or building a portfolio for a young person, then sequence-of-returns risk should be much less of a concern, and a portfolio like Tom’s might make sense. In fact, if you’re more than 10 or so years away from needing to draw on your funds and have some dollars set aside for whatever might come up in the meantime, then in that case, I would absolutely consider an all-stock portfolio. Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam's Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

Saving

A Very Humble Saving

Mark Crothers  |  Oct 1, 2026

"I only started switching about five years ago, and I never tracked the cost. As I remember it, LED bulbs initially carried a $3 or $4 premium over incandescent, but prices dropped quickly after the ban. I'd estimate my total spend at a few hundred dollars, and certainly no more than $500. Even at that upper figure, the savings of roughly $150 a year are a solid ongoing return, around 30% annually. I'd be thrilled if my portfolio made that every year!"
- Mark Crothers
Read more »

Life Events

Laundered

ArticleJeffrey K. Actor  |  Oct 3, 2026

FINANCIAL EMERGENCIES have a way of compounding when least expected. This is often coined as a correlated risk. I call it running out of clean underwear.  My father used to profess, in emergencies, that turning pairs inside out was a legitimate way to extend undergarment use under duress. Financially, this is merely extending the life of a depreciating asset.  I am sure my mother would have refuted this concept. Nevertheless, before you judge me too harshly, allow me to share the situational details. Three weeks ago our 7 year old washing machine, an example of aging capital equipment, began exhibiting signs of being possessed. Wash cycles were accompanied with grinding noises and violent walks across the floor. Spin cycles initiated poltergeist-like behavior, with heavy banging and metallic thuds made by nether-world demons. An internet search revealed the probable cause of the machine’s paranormal behavior, which was likely broken suspension rods or damaged shock absorbers holding the inner tub in place. After watching 8 or 9 YouTube videos, I decided that I had the inner fortitude to de-demonize our beloved washing machine. And being thrifty, I wished to avoid the major capital expenditure of replacing the washer. I consider myself handy and even pride myself on the 65% success rate for fixing household appliances. Yes, I freely admit that past performance is no guarantee of success. However, since I was attempting to maintain my existing emergency fund, I ordered new drum springs; at 7 years old it seemed financially responsible to repair rather than replace the machine. Upon arrival of the rods, I subsequently installed them in a mere 3 hours (I like to think of myself as methodical, rather than speedy). With a screwdriver in hand, one bruised elbow, and my pride on the line, I separated the whites from the darks and ran a load. Success! Unfortunately, the clean clothes ran up against another obstacle. Our 10 year old dryer must have been jealous of the attention its utility counterpart received. What are the odds that both a washer and a dryer would malfunction in the same week? Call it correlated asset failure. In my house, in hindsight, the odds were pretty darn high. One appliance repair was manageable. Two was beginning to feel like collusion between utilities. To make matters worse, the washing machine was only functional for two loads. Just because you can purchase parts on the internet does not guarantee long term utility after installment, in essence rendering my original repair invalid. Sunken costs for a depreciating asset. In this case, I probably broke a plastic piece holding the inner tub while replacing the springs. Unfortunately, I was lulled into a false sense of security, and was outside the house when those diabolical mechanical fiends struck again. When I returned, the washer was in full demonic dance, this time mischievously thumping our 17 year old water heater. The water tank wanted no part of the dance, and promptly sprung a supply line leak.  Great. In hindsight, advocating for a larger emergency fund balance would have been prudent for someone like me with a known 35% failure rate. I ran to the big box store to purchase a new pipe and some sealing tape, but silly me, I forgot to take measurements of the tank and valves. I called my wife in the parking lot to assist. My mistake was to ask her to check if the tank’s intake valve was functional. It was not, evident by her high pitched scream and the clear sound of water gushing. Note to self: remember to shut off the main water supply before asking the wife to help with water tank issues.  Did I mention that our daughter’s future in-laws were coming to dinner the next day?  In the end, we purchased a new water heater and were only without water for two days. We also purchased a washing machine, but it took roughly three weeks for delivery, as we required a difficult footprint size to fill the space occupied by the previous device.  Our emergency fund survived, albeit at a lower level than anticipated. As a side note, I was able to fix the dryer, for the most part, so that a full replacement was not necessary.  The experience taught me a few lessons. First, household financial risks may appear independent, yet often this is not the case. It was easy to fathom we had our unexpected events covered with our existing emergency fund. Yet compounding systemic appliance failures pushed the unexpected expenses towards our theoretical limits. Second, my father was only partially correct. Underwear is not a renewable asset. I should also think about establishing a separate Fruit of the Loom reserve account to accompany our current emergency fund. A decision my mother would have approved. Jeffrey K. Actor, PhD, was a professor at a major medical school in Houston for more than 25 years, serving as an academic researcher with interests in how immune responses function to fight pathogenic diseases. Jeff’s retirement goals are to write short science fiction stories, volunteer in the community and spend time in his garden. Check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

In Retirement

Strategic Retirement Income

Gordy Vytlacil  |  Oct 3, 2026

"I have a total return portfolio but the first money I spend is the dividends kicked out. If more is needed then I sell the fund with highest basis."
- Randy Dobkin
Read more »

Retirement

Will Congress Wait Until the Last Minute on Social Security?

Jeff Peck  |  Sep 27, 2026

"“we should demand…” I agree but voting, our only lever ?, doesn’t seem to change anything. New people, same result. 🤷‍♂️"
- Andy Morrison
Read more »

Lists

Jonathan’s Parting Thoughts: No. 6

Jonathan Clements  |  Oct 2, 2026

"I recently read this article and thought it might be interesting for folks to ponder, https://danhaylett.substack.com/p/the-five-things-worth-paying-for?ck_subscriber_id=3858874081&utm_source=convertkit&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The%20Investors%20Newsletter%20-%2023384925."
- Andy Morrison
Read more »

Investing

The Silent Committee

John Goodell  |  Sep 14, 2026

"According to the Business section of today's NYTimes,so far this year (as of 4 Oct 2026) hedge funds have borrowed $3.7T from banks with a large portion of this used to bet in the stock market. Is this a cause of overvaluation?"
- Cammer Michael
Read more »

Investing

Financial Ruin for Beginners

Mark Crothers  |  Oct 6, 2026

"Brah! You're so naive! Crypto baby! All you need to know. To the moon!"
- bbbobbins
Read more »

Investing

Rich or Wealthy?

R Quinn  |  Oct 5, 2026

"Sure there are exceptions. I've huge admiration for Gates for his efforts to microchip everyone through vaccines, be a whatabout him distraction for Trumpites re island activities substantially improve world health, education and equality. Plus the giving pledge. But there are also billionaire/trillionaires who seem to revel in a Dr Evil persona. Of course creating work and wealth for others goes with the job of being a mega entrepreneur. They literally can't do it alone no matter how slick their PR. I don't think you can say sports stars and entertainers don't contribute lasting value. I still remember viscerally Tommy Smith's header in Rome* and I was a young child at the time. You ever heard of a little LP called Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band? Or seen Godfather Part II? Or cried over a book? Plus you can actually measure the economy boost on a city when Beyonce or Taylor Swift is in town. But they do tend to be more demonstrably socially aware. Or just do better PR, who really knows. *IYKYK YNWA"
- bbbobbins
Read more »

Health

Medicare Part D premium shock 2027

R Quinn  |  Sep 29, 2026

"You’re absolutely right. The law was probably written by the insurers. As I said, all FDA approved drugs should be on every formulary. I have many years explaining health benefits to people but trying to cover all the variables individuals face with Part D is ridiculous. The fact people can be at risk for a Rx they weren’t taking at the start of the year is just wrong. The entire structure of competition is working against people."
- R Quinn
Read more »

In Retirement

Is now the time for an annuity?

R Quinn  |  Oct 2, 2026

"My understanding is you can fund a Charitable Gift Annuity (CGA) from either an IRA or after-tax funds. The $55,000 limit applies to an IRA funded CGA. After-tax funded CGAs are very different. I don't think there is a hard limit on after-tax funded CGAs. There may be a limit on how much of an initial tax deduction you can get - limited by your AGI. Fidelity has a good explanation."
- RCC
Read more »

From HumbleDollar Founder Jonathan Clements

Happiness

Let’s Get Happy

AMERICA’S HAPPINESS plunged during the pandemic. I’d assumed that survey result was an aberration, and perhaps that’ll still prove to be the case. But…
Read more »

Investing

Why Bonds Matter

ArticleAdam M. Grossman  |  Oct 3, 2026

RECENTLY, A READER—let’s call him Tom—posed this question: If stocks historically have delivered far better returns than bonds, then why should an investor own any bonds at all? Even with the stock market's unpredictable ups and downs, wouldn't you end up way ahead by betting only on stocks over the long term? It's a fair question. Over the past 100 years, stocks have delivered returns of roughly 10% per year, while bonds have returned just 5%. More recently, that gap has been even wider. Between 2016 and 2025, the S&P 500 gained nearly 15% per year, on average, while bonds gained less than 2%. And as we've experienced in recent years, bonds aren’t without risk, so why not just go all in with a 100% stock portfolio? The most common answer to this question involves a phenomenon known as sequence-of-returns risk. That’s the risk posed to retirees by an unpredictable stock market. Suppose, for example, you retire on a Friday, and stocks drop the following Monday. This would, of course, be unnerving, but it could become a real problem if you’re forced to sell stocks while they’re depressed. Too many forced sales can cause a portfolio to deplete too quickly. Tom, the reader who posed this question, is an experienced investor and well aware of sequence-of-returns risk. His view, though, is that it’s a fear that’s overblown. Even if stocks drop from time to time, he argued, the impact should be modest. That’s because the loss an investor actually experiences in any given year would be limited by the amount withdrawn in that year. Suppose, for example, a retiree is taking withdrawals at a 4% annual rate. Even if the market were to drop 50%, that 50% loss would only be applied to the 4% withdrawal, resulting in a loss of just 2%. And since the stock market has delivered such superior performance overall, Tom asked, shouldn’t that more than offset single-digit losses like this, especially if they occur only every once in a while? It was a good question, so I ran the numbers, starting with a period that was particularly punishing for stock market investors: In 2000, the U.S. market dropped 9%. In 2001, it dropped a further 12%, and in 2002, it dropped yet another 22%. What would’ve happened if you’d retired at the beginning of 2000 with an all-stock portfolio and started taking withdrawals at a rate of 4% per year? In that case, the funds would have run down nearly to zero within 25 years. And if the withdrawal rate had been even just a little higher—4.5% instead of 4%—the funds would’ve been fully depleted within 20 years. Does that mean Tom’s 100%-stock strategy would be inadvisable? The answer is nuanced. Here are some key points to consider: First, it’s important to recognize that a retirement in 2000 was close to a worst-case scenario. Looking at retirement dates over the past 100 years, there were just two other cases in which a portfolio would have deteriorated so quickly over the course of a 25-year retirement. The first, not surprisingly, was 1929. The second was 1969, just before the malaise of the 1970s, when market returns stagnated while inflation accelerated. Aside from those limited cases, an all-stock portfolio would have been a winning strategy in nearly every other time period. In 91% of rolling 25-year periods between 1926 and 2025, a retiree would’ve ended up with more money after 25 years of withdrawals than on the first day of retirement. In about half of 25-year periods, the amount of money in the bank after 25 years would have been five times more than at the beginning of the period. Tom’s all-stock strategy, in other words, would have been the right choice in nearly every case over the past 100 years. Still, I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone approaching retirement, for these five reasons. First, and probably most important, is the fact that we each have only one chance at retirement. If we happen to end up with an unlucky sequence like in 1929, 1969 or 2000, it would be cold comfort to know that we were simply unlucky. As Bill Bernstein likes to point out, the odds of losing at Russian roulette are just one-in-six, but it goes without saying that still none of us would take that risk. Similarly, we can’t know what the future holds, so that’s why I’d recommend an asset allocation that, statistically speaking, might be more conservative than necessary. Another reality is that history is an imperfect guide to the future. In the past, there have been just three very tough periods for new retirees, but there’s no guarantee what path the market will follow in the future. Look no further than Japan, which only recently emerged from a 34-year bear market. Another risk is inflation, which was a key reason why the late-1960s were such a difficult time to retire. The government’s difficulty in reining in inflation since the pandemic is a reminder of this risk. Another consideration: I assumed in my simulation that a retiree’s portfolio withdrawals would follow the popular 4% rule, starting at 4% in the first year of retirement, then increasing in lockstep with inflation. Those assumptions are useful for financial modeling but don’t reflect the way real people spend money, which varies much more from year to year. If I had assumed spending that was even modestly higher than 4%, the failure rate would have been much higher. The last reason I’d be wary of an all-stock portfolio isn’t mathematical at all. It’s the reality that stock market declines can be enormously upsetting. So even if you can theoretically afford to take more risk, that doesn’t mean you’ll be happy when the market inevitably declines at some point—or at multiple points—during retirement. A final note: So far, this discussion has been limited to retirees. If you’re early in your working years or building a portfolio for a young person, then sequence-of-returns risk should be much less of a concern, and a portfolio like Tom’s might make sense. In fact, if you’re more than 10 or so years away from needing to draw on your funds and have some dollars set aside for whatever might come up in the meantime, then in that case, I would absolutely consider an all-stock portfolio. Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam's Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

Saving

A Very Humble Saving

Mark Crothers  |  Oct 1, 2026

"I only started switching about five years ago, and I never tracked the cost. As I remember it, LED bulbs initially carried a $3 or $4 premium over incandescent, but prices dropped quickly after the ban. I'd estimate my total spend at a few hundred dollars, and certainly no more than $500. Even at that upper figure, the savings of roughly $150 a year are a solid ongoing return, around 30% annually. I'd be thrilled if my portfolio made that every year!"
- Mark Crothers
Read more »

Life Events

Laundered

ArticleJeffrey K. Actor  |  Oct 3, 2026

FINANCIAL EMERGENCIES have a way of compounding when least expected. This is often coined as a correlated risk. I call it running out of clean underwear.  My father used to profess, in emergencies, that turning pairs inside out was a legitimate way to extend undergarment use under duress. Financially, this is merely extending the life of a depreciating asset.  I am sure my mother would have refuted this concept. Nevertheless, before you judge me too harshly, allow me to share the situational details. Three weeks ago our 7 year old washing machine, an example of aging capital equipment, began exhibiting signs of being possessed. Wash cycles were accompanied with grinding noises and violent walks across the floor. Spin cycles initiated poltergeist-like behavior, with heavy banging and metallic thuds made by nether-world demons. An internet search revealed the probable cause of the machine’s paranormal behavior, which was likely broken suspension rods or damaged shock absorbers holding the inner tub in place. After watching 8 or 9 YouTube videos, I decided that I had the inner fortitude to de-demonize our beloved washing machine. And being thrifty, I wished to avoid the major capital expenditure of replacing the washer. I consider myself handy and even pride myself on the 65% success rate for fixing household appliances. Yes, I freely admit that past performance is no guarantee of success. However, since I was attempting to maintain my existing emergency fund, I ordered new drum springs; at 7 years old it seemed financially responsible to repair rather than replace the machine. Upon arrival of the rods, I subsequently installed them in a mere 3 hours (I like to think of myself as methodical, rather than speedy). With a screwdriver in hand, one bruised elbow, and my pride on the line, I separated the whites from the darks and ran a load. Success! Unfortunately, the clean clothes ran up against another obstacle. Our 10 year old dryer must have been jealous of the attention its utility counterpart received. What are the odds that both a washer and a dryer would malfunction in the same week? Call it correlated asset failure. In my house, in hindsight, the odds were pretty darn high. One appliance repair was manageable. Two was beginning to feel like collusion between utilities. To make matters worse, the washing machine was only functional for two loads. Just because you can purchase parts on the internet does not guarantee long term utility after installment, in essence rendering my original repair invalid. Sunken costs for a depreciating asset. In this case, I probably broke a plastic piece holding the inner tub while replacing the springs. Unfortunately, I was lulled into a false sense of security, and was outside the house when those diabolical mechanical fiends struck again. When I returned, the washer was in full demonic dance, this time mischievously thumping our 17 year old water heater. The water tank wanted no part of the dance, and promptly sprung a supply line leak.  Great. In hindsight, advocating for a larger emergency fund balance would have been prudent for someone like me with a known 35% failure rate. I ran to the big box store to purchase a new pipe and some sealing tape, but silly me, I forgot to take measurements of the tank and valves. I called my wife in the parking lot to assist. My mistake was to ask her to check if the tank’s intake valve was functional. It was not, evident by her high pitched scream and the clear sound of water gushing. Note to self: remember to shut off the main water supply before asking the wife to help with water tank issues.  Did I mention that our daughter’s future in-laws were coming to dinner the next day?  In the end, we purchased a new water heater and were only without water for two days. We also purchased a washing machine, but it took roughly three weeks for delivery, as we required a difficult footprint size to fill the space occupied by the previous device.  Our emergency fund survived, albeit at a lower level than anticipated. As a side note, I was able to fix the dryer, for the most part, so that a full replacement was not necessary.  The experience taught me a few lessons. First, household financial risks may appear independent, yet often this is not the case. It was easy to fathom we had our unexpected events covered with our existing emergency fund. Yet compounding systemic appliance failures pushed the unexpected expenses towards our theoretical limits. Second, my father was only partially correct. Underwear is not a renewable asset. I should also think about establishing a separate Fruit of the Loom reserve account to accompany our current emergency fund. A decision my mother would have approved. Jeffrey K. Actor, PhD, was a professor at a major medical school in Houston for more than 25 years, serving as an academic researcher with interests in how immune responses function to fight pathogenic diseases. Jeff’s retirement goals are to write short science fiction stories, volunteer in the community and spend time in his garden. Check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

In Retirement

Strategic Retirement Income

Gordy Vytlacil  |  Oct 3, 2026

"I have a total return portfolio but the first money I spend is the dividends kicked out. If more is needed then I sell the fund with highest basis."
- Randy Dobkin
Read more »

Free Newsletter

Get Educated

Manifesto

Oct 4, 2026

NO. 51: RENTAL real estate can be a great investment. But it’s also a big, leveraged, undiversified bet and a lot of hassle. A diversified stock portfolio is less work—and arguably less risky.

humans

Oct 6, 2026

NO. 27: WE THINK we can forecast the stock market’s direction. Most experts agree it’s impossible to predict where stocks will head next, and yet almost every investor has an opinion. Why? Partly, it’s because market swings have a huge impact on our day-to-day wealth. But partly, it’s hindsight bias: Bull and bear markets seem all too predictable—in retrospect.

Truths

Oct 6, 2026

NO. 94: IF YOU REFINANCE your mortgage to take advantage of lower rates, you’ll cut your monthly payment, but you may also set yourself back financially. Suppose you’re eight years into a 30-year mortgage. If you refinance with another 30-year loan, your monthly payment could drop sharply—but it’ll also be eight extra years until you’re debt-free.

act

Oct 5, 2026

GENERATE TAXABLE income if this will be a low-income year. You might sell winning stocks in your taxable account, cash in savings bonds or convert part of your traditional IRA to a Roth. Result: You could end up paying federal taxes at just 10% or 12%, and perhaps 0% on your capital gains—a bargain if you foresee getting taxed at higher rates down the road.

Money Guide

Start Here
Planner
Portfolio
Retire
Invest
College-bound kids?

Manifesto

Oct 4, 2026

NO. 51: RENTAL real estate can be a great investment. But it’s also a big, leveraged, undiversified bet and a lot of hassle. A diversified stock portfolio is less work—and arguably less risky.

Spotlight: Advisors

Schwab or Vanguard?

Rachna Condos   |  Jan 12, 2026

Would love some insight/suggestions/experience from this well versed and knowledgeable group. My husband has two tax deferred accounts that have a substantial balance and that he needs to rollover into an IRA now that he is fully retired. We currently have brokerage accounts at Schwab…
Read more »

Finding a web site that lists and rates fiduciary asset managers

Charles Mcclintick   |  Feb 8, 2025

Several years ago I found a web site that listed fiduciary money managers nationwide and would list ones in your area and if they had been any complaints or they had been in trouble. I think this was a non profit website maybe run by…
Read more »

The Quiet Failure of Good Advice

Javier Escobar   |  May 29, 2026

A couple of year after retiring from a career in translation and the organization of international conferences, I enrolled in a graduate program for Financial Planners at Rice University and subsequently passed the CFP exam. I didn’t intend to go back to work, and I…
Read more »

One Good Call?

Mark Crothers   |  Apr 14, 2026

We recently had another meeting with my wife's financial advisor. At our previous meeting I'd been fairly open about my opinion that he hadn't delivered meaningful investment gains compared to my own self-managed Vanguard portfolio, and at considerably higher fees. I suspect he wasn't thrilled…
Read more »

Keep it Simpler

David S   |  Feb 14, 2026

I recently had my quarterly review with my financial advisor at a well-known national RIA with an office in my city. They prepare a thorough presentation with economic updates and detailed performance on all my holdings. While I follow my portfolio regularly, these meetings are…
Read more »

Personal Touch

Andrew Forsythe   |  Aug 2, 2021

I’M 69 YEARS OLD and so have spent most of my life dealing with people—and businesses—in person. That said, I’ve loved and greatly benefited from the internet revolution and appreciate its marvels in a way that only a person who lived in the “before” period…
Read more »

Spotlight: Perry

Do you know about community property trusts?

William Perry   |  Sep 24, 2024

Five non community property states - Alaska, Florida, Kentucky, South Dakota and Tennessee, currently allow married couples to create community property trusts (CPT). The benefit of a CPT is the potential income tax savings to a surviving spouse via the full 'step-up' in basis of a home or other trust assets that occurs when the first spouse dies when assets…
Read more »

FAQs IRS added March 20, 2025 regarding Employee Retention Credit

William Perry   |  May 5, 2025

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and a spike in unemployment federal tax law was modified and the Employee Retention Credit (ERC) was born. The ERC was a refundable tax credit for certain eligible businesses and tax-exempt organizations that had employees and were affected during the COVID-19 pandemic. The business, tax community and the Internal Revenue Service continue to deal with…
Read more »

Forfeiture laws vs. Tax laws

William Perry   |  Apr 24, 2025

The link below is to an interesting, to me, Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals tax case that was published March 19, 2025 titled Hubbard v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/25a0064p-06.pdf I was not previously aware that there are two types of criminal forfeitures and the impact, at least so far, determined the taxability of a IRA distribution after forfeiture when…
Read more »

EO 14249 Mandated Electronic Payments

William Perry   |  May 8, 2025

On March 25, 2025, the President of the United States signed Executive Order #14249 titled Protecting America’s Bank Account Against Fraud, Waste, and Abuse, which was published in the Federal Register on March 28. The fact sheet states that, effective September 30, 2025, the Federal government will cease issuing paper checks for all disbursements, including intragovernmental payments, benefits, vendor payments,…
Read more »

Tips, not TIPS

William Perry   |  Sep 11, 2025

Humble Dollar frequently posts articles about TIPS - Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities. This post is not about inflation protected bonds. The OBBBA includes new code 224, a deduction for tax years 2025-2028, for up to $25,000 in qualified tips received during the year for cash tips received by an individual in an occupation that customarily and regularly received tips before 2024.…
Read more »

Final Secure 2.0 regulations regarding catch up contributions

William Perry   |  Sep 15, 2025

This morning the IRS in IR-2025-91 announced that the pending Secure 2.0 final regulations regarding catch-up contributions to qualified retirement plans will be published tomorrow, 9/16/2025, in the federal register. My initial reading of a summary has two key takeaways for me. A requirement that catch-up contributions that will require such catch-up contributions to be ROTH for certain taxpayers based…
Read more »
FREE NEWSLETTER
How To
Follow Us
HumbleDollar · https://humbledollar.com/ · printed Oct 6, 2026

Log in