this conversation is mostly dead, but i wanted to sound my two bits. my credentials, i am a financial planner. first i hope you did not sink you money into the stock market. i have been in cash for almost a year now and i am no market genius (those who are still in have been shorting the market and making millions all year). it is shocking how many "planners" and brokers urged their clients to "invest for the long term" and hold in the market. if your planner or broker has been saying this this last year, you should fire them. the stock market is not a long term investment. in needs to be watched daily and adjusted daily. money is never lost in the market. it only changes hands. if you lose somebody else won. the winners are those who know what is going on and adjusting their strategy daily. if this is not something you can do, hire somebody who can, get out, or suffer the cost of ignorance as those who know (major investors and fund managers) take your money. Second, i hope you did not bury your cash in a coffee can in the back yard�"in other words, pay cash and hold no mortgage. paying cash is a very expensive way to own a house. the reason being you are burying you money. you will realize appreciation but that is pointless from the standpoint of cash flow and you have to sell to get it. this money could have easily generated more than the cost of holding the mortgage. there are also tax savings on the mortgage debt if you pay it off. this is know as a lost opportunity cost. it is as real of a figure to be calculated just as an fees or interest paid. example: if i pay no interest i loose nothing. right? wrong. i loose out on what i could have done. if i could have made 8% and it cost me 6% for the mortgage i made 2% plus tax savings. FYI i am a lazy investor with most my money managed by others and i make (yeild not average) 24% with no loss of principle risks. with effort you can do better. for me to have this money in my house would be a compounding loss of 18% plus the loss of my mortgage right off. cost of money is important, but is just part of the equation, not the answer to it. the spread or the margin in the number that matters, not the cost. paying off a mortgage can cost you your retirement. the most important part of any financial plan is time. if you spend the first half of you career paying down a mortgage rather than investing, you are shorting yourself. paying down your mortgage faster is almost as bad. mortgage interest is front loaded. you only get the promised rate if you go the term. pay it of faster and the percent paid is higher. what i would recommend people do in such a situation is pay it cash and forgo all the fees associated with financed closings. then immediately after, open a HELOC for the maximum amount possible and start looking for ways to reinvest and grow that capital all the while controlling the real estate. there is no cost to have the HELOC and usually no fee to open it. you can go in and out as much as you want and use it like a private bank. leave non working mey in the realestate, but have access to it to use for opportunities. you only pay interest on what is out and are only required an interest only payment. my house equity actually pays for the house debt and then some because it is working. right now would be a great time to have access to those funds. real estate and stock investment are all on fire sale. if you don't understand the market find someone who does. if you don't understand real estate, read some books and attend some seminars. if you are lazy, look into hard money lending or payday lending for 18-36% interest. buy some rental properties and cash flow them (rents are on the rise) and reap even more tax advantages. there are so many great places to earn money on your money rather than "burying" it. I would recommend the same with permanent life insurance and even investing some funds in it. just do something, actually do lots of different things. risky? i think keeping the money out of the banks control is the best way to minimize risk. give it up to the financial institutions and they will happily follow the the model i am recommending only they won't be sharing the profit with you. to most, this sounds like terrible advice. well most people in this country are not wealthy and have no idea how to become such. learn to act like a rich person, not by spending like one per se, but by understanding that money is not math, it is a commodity and needs to be treated as such. you cannot park it nor can you settle for small returns. personal financial models are worthless. you need to learn business finance principles and apply them to you personal finances. this is then main difference between the wealthy and the non. it is not the amount of money the have (net worth) it is about how much they have to spend (cashflow). many rich people are terribly poor on the books but have plenty to spend. why is that? they understand money and the laws that govern it. your first dollar should be spent on education. build a network of advisers and mentors and for goodness sake don't listen to the talking heads and radio "gurus". if they are so good at making money, why are they working for a radio station and who is paying the bills (banks and investment houses who want your money buying ads). all that said. this opinion is based on the person applying these principles being trustworthy with money. if you can't discipline yourself, pay off the house and invest in a 401k. if you are disciplined, stay away from both. books i would recommend, eye openers all of them: rich dad poor dad (kiosaki) who took my money (kiosaki) LEAP (castiglione) killing sacred cows (gunderson) sorry for the rant and the poor spelling. some of the philosophies presented, even by those with letters after their name were disturbing to me. such advice has cost millions of people billions of dollars this year. any wanting a larger book list or wanting to discuss any of this "crazy" advice further, feel free to contact me off forum or invite me into another discussion. i love this topic and love to offer my opinions. the fee i charge for personal planning advice is zero. one of my personal beliefs is that you don't pay for financial advice. i do what i do because somebody once taught me and i am paying it forward. so you can dismiss any hidden agendas. my opinions are what i personally believe and practice but by no means the only way to the goal. great discussion all-even those i disagree with. thanks for the thread and the interest in helping each other. kendal.liddle@gmail.com

i agree with you conceptually about only investing in thing you believe in, or rather in things you can stomach as most investments and industries have a downside if you look hard enough. eventually you get to exploited workers and poisoned rivers and solid waste. i personally struggled with the payday investment i made. the return was high, but i did not want to be associated with it. i said no for about 6 months. over that six months i learned how they (where my money is now) did business. after i understood it i had a hard time thinking of it any differently than a bank. they both loan money based on ones ability to earn money and pay it back. the only difference is the duration and the size of the loan. a bank allows me to spend money i don't have on a credit card and then charges me 13-18% until i pay them back while they themselves are leveraged 10 to 1 on those dollars loaned. the payday place will only loan me money that will be covered in my NEXT paycheck and charge me a flat fee of $5 or $10 while they themselves have a dollar for every dollar they loan out. when i look at it like that i really had no problem with the payday place, but started to have them with the banks. the payday places are not dragging the economy down because of their recklessness. they are also not enslaving an entire generation by offering them credit they cannot pay back. there are people who use them recklessly, and it is real easy to point them out because they are the fringe. it is a little harder to point out the middle class suburbanite who is a slave to their credit card and bank because they get up and go to work each day and keep a nice yard but are living on credit. both industries lend money and both are technically guilty of charging people who don't have money. they are in business to make money, not give it away. in the end neither is good nor bad just as fire is neither good nor bad. the good or bad all depends on who uses it and how they use it. the payday places service a far less afluent and unsophisticated clientele and therefore gives them very little wiggle room to abuse the system. if they want to stay one paycheck behind for the rest of their lives, that is about all they can do. the bank will let me get decades behind because they assume i am responsible and won't let it come to that but do little to stop me and recently have even encouraged me to do so. in my mind it is a match compared to the bonfire. both can be abused, but the potential abuse of a credit card is far greater. but there may be other payday places that have different policies than where i invested. mind you i don't have equity in the payday place�"they borrowed money from me to lend. in short my money is on deposit to be lent out just as if i put it in a savings account for the bank to lend out on a credit card loan. the main difference is my rate of return is almost 10 times higher but not FDIC insured. the only thing i do struggle with is the 10% they charge for cashing checks. this is outrageous in my opinion. i can't understand why anybody would do that unless they were unable to cash it elsewhere and i won't speculate as to why. but in the end they have their reason and are paying a premium for it. and with that i leave it. cigarettes are another issue and i am totally with you. i feel the same way about other products as well most are not as overtly damaging, but their products do carry liability and they push them with abandon to those who are hurt by them. not just talking guns and alcohol. a few minutes watching saturday morning cartoons was an eyeopener to the type of products marketed to kids. slap a mcdonald's logo on a bucket of mud and i think my kids would want to eat it. a friend of mine who is militant about his hate for phillip-morris and smoking in general (i think he lost a parent to lung cancer) holds half his portfolio in tobacco stocks. he justification was that it "those people" are going to annoy him with their smoke and take his taxes in healthcare, they are going to pay him for it. an interesting take on moral investing practices, but for him it makes sense. i respect your desire to not follow my practice of investing in payday lending. we not only have to undderstand our investments, but repect if not love them. i do not love payday lending, and to be honest would rather be elsewhere, but for the time being it is a good place and i am no so morally apposed to money lending as to not take the opportunity. i do however own no bank stocks for obvious reasons, i think their model is risky. i also think they are on the more unethical side of business. they have laws and loopholes that allow them to do things that are illegal to any other company. id it because we need their services and that is what it takes, or is it because they have power to influence if not make laws that favor them? i think recent events have shown us it is a little of both. before i sound too anti-establishment, let me say i think financial institutions are important and necessary�"ie. banks, insurance companies, the US government, the FED, and even payday lenders. BUT they are in busniness to make themselves rich, not us. if you do not understand what they are doing, how they make money, or worse, what you are doing, they will take advantage of you. thus education. it is through education that you can see the smoke and mirrors they use to make you feel good about making them rich at your expense. one of the most ubiquitous is the home mortgage. i am emphatic that the most expensive ways to buy a house are in this order; cash, paid off early mortgage, continually refinanced mortgage, a 15-year note, a 30-year note, ARM, variable rate, interest only, and deferred interest-AKA sub-prime being the cheapest. that said, i don't like differed interest as it assumes the risk in the real estate market and if used by the uneducated or irresponsible it can (and has) blown up in the borrowers face. what does the bank want you to do? they love you to take out a 30 year and refinance every few years or pay it off early. if you are going to take it to term, they prefer you take out a 15-year because it makes them more money and that is why they have a cheaper rate to take it�"they need to give you incentive to do what benefits them and think you are getting the better end of the deal�"if it makes them more money, how can it also save you money and show up in two places at once? this all sounds like hericy i know. but where do we get our financial education from? our bank? alan greenspan has a nice quote about the variable interest only mortgage being the best deal out there if people only knew how to use it and the 30 year not serving its customers as the think. i will see if i can find it. the mortgage subject was perhaps the most eye-opening and influential education i ever had in finance. it is the lesson that taught me to see the whole equation and not look at a financial strategy in a vacuum. it taught me to understand finance on a macro economic level to understand how to best use products on a micro economic level. it is painful and feels like you brain is removed and turned around and put back in. but i assure you it is all true and useful information, but it requires the user to be responsible for their financial life and some are not willing to do this and for them it is not wise to have control. just as fire in the hands a of one is destructive and to another the opposite. what i am talking about is basic business finance�"in short figuring out the lost opportunity cost and the taking the greatest margin. if done properly with understanding risk is minimized and growth is maximized. some will refuse to believe, but that does not prove those strategies wrong. i myself do not practice whole-heartedly all the strategies i know an believe because of issues regarding timing, my own laziness or whatever. this does not mean i don't acknowledge their strengths or potential. but it serves me to understand alternatives. there are many i have encountered on this forum and in other places who flat out throw up a wall and won't even try to understand that there are several strategies to use in every situation and they all have merits. my beef is with those who claim merits that are not truly there or ignore others. those who emotionally attach themselves to dogma that was sold to them without trying to understand. i have been guilty of this and still am at times and it only hurts myself. when i have a few hours to spend with a calculator, i will start a new thread and actually run the numbers on the most popular mortgage products side-by-side including paying cash. i will treat all as equals. it is amazing how different the outcome is from popular beliefs, but if you look at who is selling the mortgages and the information i guess it is not shocking. it won't prove anything other than which is the most expensive in terms of money and what risks are inherent in each scenario. the individual would have to choose which is best for them. the problem is that most choose the wrong thing for what they claim to want. if you know how they each work you can choose more appropriately for your goals whatever they may be.

Fascinating discussion, and timely for me, as I am trying to decide whether to retire. My wonderful boss left last month for a new job and they transferred in someone who is a total idiot. We saw our financial advisor on Monday and he agrees that we can afford it. I am 61 and hubby is 49; he has eleven years before he can retire from his job (not Federal). I have 29 years in the Fed government, so would get a defined pension and keep my health benefits. We have been saving at a good clip for the past 15 years (married for 17 years) but took a hit in the dot.com bust and again last year. Since the market went haywire, I've focused on paying off the mortgage. Have $18K left to pay. Right now, our investments are averaging 4%, so the mortgage paydown seemed like the better option. Expect to have it paid off by next year at the latest. (BTW, we don't include home equity in our "assets" because we would have to sell to obtain the value, and we love our location.) My problem may be off-topic. I have no idea what I would do if I retired. We don't have kids and our parents are healthy. I have hobbies, but can't imagine staying home all day. Most of my friends are still working. You are lucky that your DH may be retiring soon.

FF - I talked to her last night and she said that her FP charges based on the amount of money she manages for her, not hourly or by commission, so she is confident that she's not ill advising for the FP's own gain. She also said that the FP said to consult a tax specialist, which made me breathe a sigh of relief. She made an offer on the condo and sent me the comps to look at after the fact. I don't know what she was thinking because she lowballed her offer when the comps were alot higher. She offered $380K on a $420K asking price, when the comps showed nothing went for less than $410K. I hope that the seller looks at it as a starting point for negotiations and doesn't flat out refuse. Here's something weird. When she told her realtor she wanted to put in an offer, the realtor didn't hightail it to get the paperwork done. She spoke to the realtor on Thursday and the papers are being faxed to her today (Saturday). I thought that was kind of odd. I always thought realtors jumped lickety split to get the offer in so the buyer doesn't become remorseful. Her realtor also didn't suggest an expiry time for the offer. I told her to call the realtor prior to the papers being faxed to put a time limit. The seller's realtor also said that another offer "may" be coming in, which I find strange since the condo has been on the market for over 4 months. We don't know if it's a bluff or they're holding out for the 2nd offer and that's why they delayed getting the contract to her. Her realtor and the seller's realtor are in the same office, which added to my suspicion. I told her to make sure that she gets a copy of the response from the seller, even if they flat out refuse it so she knows the offer was actually presented.