http://besttripchoices.com
i am a Centric venturer. this site was featured on wall street journal 11/27/2007
"You could enjoy a cruise in the Greek Isles, a car trip through gold mining ghost towns in California, or a shopping spree in New York City equally well."
first is on my to do list, i don't know about the next two.
"Cruising has experienced strong growth in recent years, thanks to the fact that you believe that the experience is not as confining as in the past. You have decided that it is affordable and more interesting than you ever thought. And, very important, it's so easy and comfortable because your hotel room goes with you wherever you are and you don't have to pack and unpack every day. You may also own a time share, the concept of owning one or two weeks of vacation time in a condo in a resort area. Time shares tend to offer excuses for travel and most of these owners venture forth regularly"
i do like cruising, done it twice (tahiti & mediterranean). greece-turkey cruise would be the next one i want to do.
27 November 2007
21 November 2007
401k vs IRA
"an IRA is always better for your beneficiaries because it lets them stretch distributions from your account over their own life expectations."
20 November 2007
US health care
from Cigna's analyst meeting:
Company said that the US system is 2x as expensive as others for the following reasons:
1. Hospitals $150-200B - US hospitals are smaller, more conveniently located, and have 50-55% occupancy (vs 95% occupancy).
2. Obesity, smoking $150-200B. Other countries are becoming more like US in obesity.
3. more CAT scans, MRIs, stents, etc
GM vs Toyota
$1800 vs $200
health care related costs per auto
Company said that the US system is 2x as expensive as others for the following reasons:
1. Hospitals $150-200B - US hospitals are smaller, more conveniently located, and have 50-55% occupancy (vs 95% occupancy).
2. Obesity, smoking $150-200B. Other countries are becoming more like US in obesity.
3. more CAT scans, MRIs, stents, etc
GM vs Toyota
$1800 vs $200
health care related costs per auto
15 November 2007
Ji's election guide
full credit goes to my fellow pegleg and health care guru ji
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p-azLm_LoI42dO80ICFBbMQ
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p-azLm_LoI42dO80ICFBbMQ
Credit card rewards
CardWeb.com, Credit-reviews.com and creditcardgoodies.com that rate the programs and provide venues for cardholders to seek and give counsel.
22 October 2007
The Good German
I watched the movie just after finishing the novel by Joseph Kanon.
The movie was a flop commercially (just over a $1m US box office despite $32m budget).
1. Black & white - Let's face it. Americans just won't turn out for a black & white movie. However, the other Clooney-Soderbergh black & white movie "Good Night, and Good Luck" grossed $31m with only a $7.5m budget and Clooney was just a supporting character, not even on the cover of the poster.
2. Not exactly a happy ending.
Anyway, let me just note some differences between the movie and the book without giving anything away (this assumes that anybody actually reads my blog, which may be optimistic).
Characters in the movie:
Jake Geismer (George Clooney) has some good action sequences in the book which I thought would be used in the movie. Jake gets away from the Russians at Adlon. Later, he has another action sequence in the parade, first on foot, then in a car. In the movie, Clooney character is a bit passive.
Tully (Tobey Maguire) - let's just say that this character has no dialogue in the book.
Lena Brandt - Lena character is almost saintly in the book, taking care of children in the hospital. In the movie, Cate Blanchett is more of a composite character, not quite saintly.
Emil Brandt is the mathematician who makes some key calculations on paper (900 calories per day). In the movie, he's just Bettman's favorite secretary.
Franz Bettmann - this one I don't quite understand. For everyone else, the movie uses the book character names. The book equivalent is von Braun who is only referred to and does not make an appearance.
Bernie Teitel is a Jew in the novel. He left Germany with his family during the 1930s and is very committed to bringing justice to the Nazi criminals.
Gunther is just a goon in the movie with no lines. In the book, he is a very important character. He was a decorated WW I veteran who became a policeman afterwards. His wife was a Jew who was fingered by the greifer. He testifies against Renate. He also helps Jake and Emil in the book, making a big sacrifice.
Congressman Breimer represents Utica, NY, home of the American Dye company which has a special relationship with a German company.
Lieutenant Schaeffer has a very substantial role in the book. I don't think he even has a line in the movie.
Danny - just a friendly bartender in the movie but in the novel, he's not exactly a boy scout.
General Sikorsky - Russian intelligence officer has several meetings with Jake and comes to a bad end in the book.
Colonel Muller signs some important pilsersigns in the book for Rosen and Erich.
Characters not in the movie:
Liz - American photographer who has an unfortunate accident. Lieutenant Schaeffer was dating her.
Renate - Greifer - a Jew who points out other Jews out to the Nazis. She has a talk with Jake right after her trial and asks for a big favor in return. She also helps Jake out with some crucial information.
Erich - Renate's son.
Dr. Rosen - business associate of Danny's, helps Lena.
Professor Brandt - Emil's father who was holding on to something.
Brian - a British reporter who helps out Jake at Adlon
The movie was a flop commercially (just over a $1m US box office despite $32m budget).
1. Black & white - Let's face it. Americans just won't turn out for a black & white movie. However, the other Clooney-Soderbergh black & white movie "Good Night, and Good Luck" grossed $31m with only a $7.5m budget and Clooney was just a supporting character, not even on the cover of the poster.
2. Not exactly a happy ending.
Anyway, let me just note some differences between the movie and the book without giving anything away (this assumes that anybody actually reads my blog, which may be optimistic).
Characters in the movie:
Jake Geismer (George Clooney) has some good action sequences in the book which I thought would be used in the movie. Jake gets away from the Russians at Adlon. Later, he has another action sequence in the parade, first on foot, then in a car. In the movie, Clooney character is a bit passive.
Tully (Tobey Maguire) - let's just say that this character has no dialogue in the book.
Lena Brandt - Lena character is almost saintly in the book, taking care of children in the hospital. In the movie, Cate Blanchett is more of a composite character, not quite saintly.
Emil Brandt is the mathematician who makes some key calculations on paper (900 calories per day). In the movie, he's just Bettman's favorite secretary.
Franz Bettmann - this one I don't quite understand. For everyone else, the movie uses the book character names. The book equivalent is von Braun who is only referred to and does not make an appearance.
Bernie Teitel is a Jew in the novel. He left Germany with his family during the 1930s and is very committed to bringing justice to the Nazi criminals.
Gunther is just a goon in the movie with no lines. In the book, he is a very important character. He was a decorated WW I veteran who became a policeman afterwards. His wife was a Jew who was fingered by the greifer. He testifies against Renate. He also helps Jake and Emil in the book, making a big sacrifice.
Congressman Breimer represents Utica, NY, home of the American Dye company which has a special relationship with a German company.
Lieutenant Schaeffer has a very substantial role in the book. I don't think he even has a line in the movie.
Danny - just a friendly bartender in the movie but in the novel, he's not exactly a boy scout.
General Sikorsky - Russian intelligence officer has several meetings with Jake and comes to a bad end in the book.
Colonel Muller signs some important pilsersigns in the book for Rosen and Erich.
Characters not in the movie:
Liz - American photographer who has an unfortunate accident. Lieutenant Schaeffer was dating her.
Renate - Greifer - a Jew who points out other Jews out to the Nazis. She has a talk with Jake right after her trial and asks for a big favor in return. She also helps Jake out with some crucial information.
Erich - Renate's son.
Dr. Rosen - business associate of Danny's, helps Lena.
Professor Brandt - Emil's father who was holding on to something.
Brian - a British reporter who helps out Jake at Adlon
02 October 2007
Real Estate article
cut & paste from investmentnews.com
When initially structuring or re-balancing a portfolio, always start with
real estate, because it is the most illiquid of investments.
For example, if a portfolio is heavily overweighted in leveraged real
estate, the client owns too much real estate in relation to other
investments, and the real estate is heavily mortgaged. Then it is critical
to reduce the risk of the remainder of the investments and provide extra
liquidity until the real estate overhang can be corrected.
Sometimes a client’s real estate is a loafing asset, which means it
doesn’t have enough of a mortgage.
The mortgage is referred to as leverage. In real estate investing,
leverage means the amount of loans made with the home or other real estate
pledged as collateral.
Since the real estate will appreciate the same amount regardless of
whether it is fully leveraged, often it is advisable to remortgage, which
would allow the homeowner to pull out cash to better diversify other
investments.
This particularly is true of the
single-family home used as a primary residence. In addition, the positive
financial leverage created by a fixed-rate home mortgage gives Americans
the most advantageous after-tax investment vehicle in the world.
The function of real estate is to protect against inflation and provide
personal enjoyment. Positive financial leverage is created when you borrow
money at one rate of interest and invest that money at a higher rate of
interest.
The fixed-rate home mortgage is one of the best examples of positive
financial leverage. We tend to take it for granted, but, in fact, no other
country in the world allows its citizens to borrow large sums of money
(relative to income) at a fixed rate of interest over such a long period.
Inflation is the loss of purchasing power through a general rise in
prices. During periods of inflation, a debtor repays loans with dollars
that are worth less in purchasing power than the dollars originally
borrowed.
Locking in a fixed-rate mortgage protects the purchasing power of your
housing dollars, creating a buffer against inflation.
A study conducted in 1978 found that not only is real estate a hedge
against inflation but leveraged private residential real estate is the
only investment that offers complete protection against inflation. That is
because when there is inflation, the interest yield on investments
increases while the rate of fixed-rate mortgages remains the same.
Not only are you achieving “positive leverage” because your money is
earning more than the funds you have invested are costing you, but you
also are repaying the mortgage in cheaper dollars.
Inflation either can be anticipated or unanticipated. Investments that
offer protection against anticipated inflation, such as debt instruments
whose yields adjust for the anticipated inflation rate, offer no
protection against unanticipated inflation.
Private residential real estate, however, protects against both.
Beware, however, of financial sales representatives who suggest borrowing
money on your house to invest in life insurance or annuities. The
commissions you pay more than wipe out any advantage you could derive from
the mortgage.
There are three key steps to properly allocating real estate assets under
functional asset allocation: First is having the appropriate percentage of
assets invested in real estate, second is having those real estate assets
properly leveraged and third is properly buttressing real estate debt with
liquidity.
In looking at the appropriate percentage of assets to invest in real
estate, we first must define our terms. Most of the people who visit our
offices are familiar with what is meant by the term net worth — total
assets minus liabilities.
However, when determining asset allocation percentages, net worth becomes
an inaccurate measure, because net worth includes assets that are either
not readily marketable or aren’t true investments. So instead of net
worth, we focus on marketable assets when determining appropriate asset
balance in a portfolio.
Net marketable assets include only the equity in investments. Total
marketable assets represent the fair market value of all the investments
included without netting out associated debt.
Functional asset allocation calls for 25% to 40% of total marketable
assets to be held in real estate. For those who are real estate
professionals or who own commercial property, this percentage may be
increased to 30% to 60% of total marketable assets.
Functional asset allocation calls for 50% to 80% leverage on real estate
assets. So if your home were worth $200,000, a mortgage of $100,000 (50%)
to $160,000 (80%) would be appropriate.
Bert Whitehead is the founder of the Alliance of Cambridge Advisors in
Franklin, Mich. This article was excerpted from his book “Why Smart People
Do Stupid Things with Money: Overcoming Financial Dysfunction” (Sterling
Publishing, 2007).
When initially structuring or re-balancing a portfolio, always start with
real estate, because it is the most illiquid of investments.
For example, if a portfolio is heavily overweighted in leveraged real
estate, the client owns too much real estate in relation to other
investments, and the real estate is heavily mortgaged. Then it is critical
to reduce the risk of the remainder of the investments and provide extra
liquidity until the real estate overhang can be corrected.
Sometimes a client’s real estate is a loafing asset, which means it
doesn’t have enough of a mortgage.
The mortgage is referred to as leverage. In real estate investing,
leverage means the amount of loans made with the home or other real estate
pledged as collateral.
Since the real estate will appreciate the same amount regardless of
whether it is fully leveraged, often it is advisable to remortgage, which
would allow the homeowner to pull out cash to better diversify other
investments.
This particularly is true of the
single-family home used as a primary residence. In addition, the positive
financial leverage created by a fixed-rate home mortgage gives Americans
the most advantageous after-tax investment vehicle in the world.
The function of real estate is to protect against inflation and provide
personal enjoyment. Positive financial leverage is created when you borrow
money at one rate of interest and invest that money at a higher rate of
interest.
The fixed-rate home mortgage is one of the best examples of positive
financial leverage. We tend to take it for granted, but, in fact, no other
country in the world allows its citizens to borrow large sums of money
(relative to income) at a fixed rate of interest over such a long period.
Inflation is the loss of purchasing power through a general rise in
prices. During periods of inflation, a debtor repays loans with dollars
that are worth less in purchasing power than the dollars originally
borrowed.
Locking in a fixed-rate mortgage protects the purchasing power of your
housing dollars, creating a buffer against inflation.
A study conducted in 1978 found that not only is real estate a hedge
against inflation but leveraged private residential real estate is the
only investment that offers complete protection against inflation. That is
because when there is inflation, the interest yield on investments
increases while the rate of fixed-rate mortgages remains the same.
Not only are you achieving “positive leverage” because your money is
earning more than the funds you have invested are costing you, but you
also are repaying the mortgage in cheaper dollars.
Inflation either can be anticipated or unanticipated. Investments that
offer protection against anticipated inflation, such as debt instruments
whose yields adjust for the anticipated inflation rate, offer no
protection against unanticipated inflation.
Private residential real estate, however, protects against both.
Beware, however, of financial sales representatives who suggest borrowing
money on your house to invest in life insurance or annuities. The
commissions you pay more than wipe out any advantage you could derive from
the mortgage.
There are three key steps to properly allocating real estate assets under
functional asset allocation: First is having the appropriate percentage of
assets invested in real estate, second is having those real estate assets
properly leveraged and third is properly buttressing real estate debt with
liquidity.
In looking at the appropriate percentage of assets to invest in real
estate, we first must define our terms. Most of the people who visit our
offices are familiar with what is meant by the term net worth — total
assets minus liabilities.
However, when determining asset allocation percentages, net worth becomes
an inaccurate measure, because net worth includes assets that are either
not readily marketable or aren’t true investments. So instead of net
worth, we focus on marketable assets when determining appropriate asset
balance in a portfolio.
Net marketable assets include only the equity in investments. Total
marketable assets represent the fair market value of all the investments
included without netting out associated debt.
Functional asset allocation calls for 25% to 40% of total marketable
assets to be held in real estate. For those who are real estate
professionals or who own commercial property, this percentage may be
increased to 30% to 60% of total marketable assets.
Functional asset allocation calls for 50% to 80% leverage on real estate
assets. So if your home were worth $200,000, a mortgage of $100,000 (50%)
to $160,000 (80%) would be appropriate.
Bert Whitehead is the founder of the Alliance of Cambridge Advisors in
Franklin, Mich. This article was excerpted from his book “Why Smart People
Do Stupid Things with Money: Overcoming Financial Dysfunction” (Sterling
Publishing, 2007).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)