Recruiting Football Talk VIII

#163,251
#163,251
Glitch said:
Mitch McConnell Now Backs Effort to Defend U.S. Elections - Rolling Stone
Click to expand...
oh yeah. he is a turd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glitch and knoxvol52
#163,253
#163,253
Jackcrevol said:
9.5% interest seems criminal + any penalties against your 401K. I would annualize any interest gained (certainly more than 9.5%) versus making home improvement.

Can you get out what you put in?

Why not HI loan or even borrow against home?
Click to expand...
Don't think there's any penalties if you use it for home repairs... As far as the interest goes it's like paying yourself it goes into your account...win,win in my book.,
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scvol7906, UTJoe, screenthis and 2 others
#163,255
#163,255
  • Like
Reactions: knoxvol52
#163,256
#163,256
Adam Sandler said:
A man needs the opposite proportional parking space size to the size of his genitalia relative to the plus or minus he is to the population average. It’s science.
Click to expand...
I drive around till I find a spot.

I neither back in, or am I entitled to two spots. Arguably, also not an *******.
 
#163,258
#163,258
knoxvol52 said:
Magic Johnson 1978-79 NCAA Tournament MVP and 1979-80 NBA Championship and MVP of the Finals ONLY ROOKIE ever to win Finals MVP.

Head to head
Beat Bird for National Championship
Beat Bird 2/3 NBA Finals
Has 5 rings compared to Bird's 3
During the 80's both rosters were stacked ....
Click to expand...
Both rosters WERE stacked, with the Lakers being the better team, with a MUCH BETTER head coach. Not saying K.C. Jones was a slouch, but he wasn't Pat Riley. Lakers were slightly better in those days, with their HOFs being better than the Celts HOFs, except for Bird.

"If I had to pick someone to hit a game-winning shot, I'm picking Michael Jordan. If I had to pick someone to hit a shot to save my life, I'm picking Larry Bird."
-Pat Riley
 
  • Like
Reactions: hooter vol, TN-POSSUM, Volunteer821 and 1 other person
#163,259
#163,259
MoCo_Vol said:
Speaking of 401k....any of you ever taken a loan out against yours?

On paper I'm not seeing much downside... big chunk to pay for the garage build I wanna do, pay back with interest rate (9.5% or lower) and even the interest is going back into my 401k...

My only gripe is the max period to pay it back appears to be 54 months (why 54 I don't know...I'm curious if it's going by calendar year though).

But it just takes the payment right out of my regular check so not like something I'd even have to setup or remember to do.
Click to expand...
I did this after we purchased a house that needed a lot of work. Mine had a much lower interest rate, but then again, you're paying yourself, so it's essentially like you're making additional contributions to the 401k. I don't believe that the additional interest counts against yearly contribution limits. The main downside for mine (not sure if this applies to you) was that it was directly tied to replacing the securities that you had liquidated to fund the loan rather than the loan amount itself. As a result, if the market moves higher, you'd have to pay more cash than you were loaned to replace the same 10000 shares of XYZ. On the other hand, if there were a downturn, you pay back less than the amount loaned. A strange way to run a railroad, but in the end, it was pretty much a wash. There were minimal fees to set it up, and no penalties, as I can remember. My repayment period was somewhat similar to yours, but I don't recall exactly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM, SpringBokVol, Orange. and 1 other person
#163,262
#163,262
Jackcrevol said:
9.5% interest seems criminal + any penalties against your 401K. I would annualize any interest gained (certainly more than 9.5%) versus making home improvement.

Can you get out what you put in?

Why not HI loan or even borrow against home?
Click to expand...

So you haven't done a 401k loan before then?

You borrow the money from yourself, the repayment + interest goes back into the 401k...in theory paying that additional 9.5% in a down stock market might net me more than had it stumbled along earning 6-8%
 
  • Like
Reactions: franklinpence and Jackcrevol
#163,263
#163,263
sutro said:
I did this after we purchased a house that needed a lot of work. Mine had a much lower interest rate, but then again, you're paying yourself, so it's essentially like you're making additional contributions to the 401k. I don't believe that the additional interest counts against yearly contribution limits. The main downside for mine (not sure if this applies to you) was that it was directly tied to replacing the securities that you had liquidated to fund the loan rather than the loan amount itself. As a result, if the market moves higher, you'd have to pay more cash than you were loaned to replace the same 10000 shares of XYZ. On the other hand, if there were a downturn, you pay back less than the amount loaned. A strange way to run a railroad, but in the end, it was pretty much a wash. There were minimal fees to set it up, and no penalties, as I can remember. My repayment period was somewhat similar to yours, but I don't recall exactly.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it appears the way mine is setup is the sum borrowed is paid back + interest. But no fluctuation would occur based on market performance. I'm not sure what the 9.5% is based off of...the way that read it was a "the highest it could be" so may be less than that. I'm also not sure where the rate came from, curious if it's based on the 401k's performance since inception.
 
#163,264
#163,264
knoxvol52 said:
Don't think there's any penalties if you use it for home repairs... As far as the interest goes it's like paying yourself it goes into your account...win,win in my book.,
Click to expand...
Although a plan is allowed to attached reasons for the use of a loan (some choose to attach the same allowable reasons for a hardship withdrawal) most plans don't restrict based off of reason/need for the loan. Due to that fact that you are agreeing to pay it back to the account there are no taxes or penalties, only a nominal distribution fee.

As for the timing of paybacks that original poster mentioned almost every plan I have ever seen uses a maximum payback window of 5 years unless it is for the purchase of a primary residence and then you have up to 15 years to pay it back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange.
#163,265
#163,265
MoCo_Vol said:
Yeah, it appears the way mine is setup is the sum borrowed is paid back + interest. But no fluctuation would occur based on market performance. I'm not sure what the 9.5% is based off of...the way that read it was a "the highest it could be" so may be less than that. I'm also not sure where the rate came from, curious if it's based on the 401k's performance since inception.
Click to expand...
Rate is determined by whatever company serves as the plan's recordkeeper but is almost always time to the prime interest rate. Most are set at prime + 1 or 2%.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange. and MoCo_Vol
#163,266
#163,266
NochNoch said:
Although a plan is allowed to attached reasons for the use of a loan (some choose to attach the same allowable reasons for a hardship withdrawal) most plans don't restrict based off of reason/need for the loan. Due to that fact that you are agreeing to pay it back to the account there are no taxes or penalties, only a nominal distribution fee.

As for the timing of paybacks that original poster mentioned almost every plan I have ever seen uses a maximum payback window of 5 years unless it is for the purchase of a primary residence and then you have up to 15 years to pay it back.
Click to expand...

Yep, it appears you get to select 2 options. "purchase of primary residence" and then the other option is basically "personal loan" and as you pointed out if for the purchase of primary residence you get upto 15 years where as the max for the other is 5 years...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange.
#163,272
#163,272
SugarCC said:
I'm not trying to debate back and forth with anyone about it...my top 3 have always been MJ, Bird, Magic; but, the highlighted part just isn't true, my friend.

The year before Magic arrived, the Lakers finished 47-35, and went to Western Conference Semi-Finals. The year before Bird, the Celtics finished 29-53. Bird's rookie year, they won 61 games, with him being the only offseason pickup. It's still the biggest improvement from one year to the next, in NBA history.
Click to expand...
Thank you @SugarCC ! That's the kind of information Laker fans gloss over. Their hatred for the Celtics blinds them to facts. It makes it impossible to have a debate about "who's the best" when factual information is not part of the conversation. Because if it was just about the facts, then everyone would have seen by now that I'm 100% right about LARRY BIRD BEING THE GREATEST BASKETBALL PLAYER OF ALL TIME.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SugarCC and Volunteer821
#163,274
#163,274
MoCo_Vol said:
Not really getting into the Larry Bird debate, but ya know someone that I think gets far too little credit for what he brought to the game of basketball.

Pete Maravich. One player I would love to have seen play in a different era. The 3 point line didn't exist for 9 of his 10 years in the league and most folks that saw him play state had it, he would have scored over 40 points a game for most his career.
Click to expand...
Pete would have gone off in any era. Not only could he shoot but he could dribble the hell out of a ball. What he was doing as opposed to his peers looked like he was doing witchcraft with the ball compared them lol. He would have definitely kept up with all the new moves in today’s game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangebloodgmc, hooter vol, ShelbourneVol and 7 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top