Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Doctor Dividend  

View Doctor Dividend's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Social Security And Portfolio Withdrawals: It's Complicated [View article]
    Mike:

    The other thing you can do is the following:

    Start taking SS at 62. See how things go for two years. If you see you don't need SS because you have enough other income at say, 64 yo, you can suspend payments. SS will start giving recrediting at 8% a year. Let's say you waited until 70 to restart getting SS, because of delaying, you would now receive payments as if you were 68 years old.

    In other words, you already used 2 out of the 8 eligible years to build up credits on the payment, so you would receive not the 70 years old payment because you didn't defer the entire time, but two years less than that, or the 68 years old payment. It's like a start, stop, restart program.

    DD
    Apr 23, 2015. 01:04 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Social Security And Portfolio Withdrawals: It's Complicated [View article]
    Roger:

    My condolences on your father's passing. If you want to be technical, her SS income went down by 1/3 but her personal take from SS doubled because she is the surviving spouse. Let's just use fictitious numbers to put this to light.

    You father had a $2000/month benefit
    Your mom had the spousal benefit of $1000/month
    Total SS income with both alive: $3000/month

    WHOEVER is the surviving spouse would receive the higher benefit between the two. If it was your mom that passed, your father as the survivor would collect just his $2000/month. Since it was the other way around, your mom gets the higher of the two benefits, which was based on your father's earning records.

    It's semantics but the explanation needs to be given so people understand how you get the numbers.

    As an aside, some people continue to mention the passing of assets via the IRA. I am presuming people are talking about stretching the IRA, another article entirely. There has been numerous talk that the stretch will go down to five years if the inheritor is anyone but the spouse. Why? So the government gets their much needed money faster. Do you take that into consideration? Again, a personal question.

    DD
    Apr 23, 2015. 10:51 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Social Security And Portfolio Withdrawals: It's Complicated [View article]
    stx:

    You don't say what your age is, but your plan, as I am reading it, has a ton of pitfalls.

    1) Taking a spousal benefit before FRA screws up your FRA benefit.

    2) You can not take spousal benefits upon each other. Only one spousal benefit is allowed per currently married couple. If you want to game the system, get a divorce, wait two years, take divorce spousal benefits upon each other, get remarried at 70.

    These are the two obvious ones. As I said, this thing is a mess and you can screw it up very easily.

    Best of luck.

    DD
    Apr 22, 2015. 02:12 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Social Security And Portfolio Withdrawals: It's Complicated [View article]
    Realtoi:

    Many people believe what you are saying. Why delay anymore than I should? I want the money I paid into it now!!

    I don't know if I will ever see a dime of it being under 40. If I do, the rules will change aplenty, but here are the questions as I was talking to my parents about it (and let me add, I work in healthcare but enjoy personal finance):

    1) What sources of income/assets do you currently have?

    2) Do these current sources currently take care of your current monthly expenses?

    3) Do you have an emergency fund for those one-off expenses?

    4) How long do you think you will live? (For me personally, my grandfather lived until 91; his identical twin lived until 93 and my grandmother who is well into her 90s is still alive and with it. So I have to plan until age 100)

    If you have enough and have longevity in your family AND you don't have a trophy wife and/or a disabled child, it makes sense to delay to make those later years better because of the guaranteed higher income.

    You mention a traditional IRA where you will have to start taking RMDs at 70. And if the market tanks by 20, 30, 40%? Sorry, you will have less income. At some point you will have to be taking more out of your IRA because the government tells you to, where you will have less of a portfolio to generate less income. The ride could be choppier. And don't forget that SS income will be counted against your Medicare number to raise that premium as well.

    Do what you want. Less than 2% of people wait until they are 70 to get the 32% raise over FRA. But hey, what do I know? I'm just a guy under 40 who is trying to help my parents maximize the system for when it matters - when they are older, much older.

    DD
    Apr 21, 2015. 10:47 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Social Security And Portfolio Withdrawals: It's Complicated [View article]
    Roger:

    A very timely article as I have been helping my parents which option is better about taking at full retirement age (FRA of 66) or waiting until 70. I would encourage people who are in their 60s to listen to Jim Lange's radio show at paytaxeslater.com and find the episode with Larry Kotlikoff.

    There are so many possible combinations that there is no one size fits all. However, like my parents, it should be a joint decision because it will effect the surviving spouse in being able to take the highest benefit possible. Kotlikoff best explains it as longevity insurance because once you are dead, you have no cash flow to worry about. The worry is not dying because you only die once, but not living up to the standard that you are used to because you have no money. And when you reverse engineer the thought process, to get an 8% increase with no investment risk every year you can wait makes delaying better in the long run.

    As for my parents, by delaying until 70 on the stronger earner's record, the crossover point will be at 80 as long as both are still alive. Even if one is deceased prior to that point, it is a $750/month increase plus inflation with the delay for life for the widow. Not small potatoes.

    DD
    Apr 21, 2015. 02:24 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Chasing High Dividend Growth Rates For Higher Total Returns [View article]
    A couple of other thoughts:

    I couldn't tell if the author rebalanced the portfolio once every 12 months or the value of the stocks removed was what was placed in the new stocks?

    Also, as someone said this was backward looking. Survivorship bias. To be fair, the author needs to find what were the Dividend Aristocrats and what if they would have been in this group of selected stocks. It is possible to do. I have been analyzing this type of idea for years, and have found those stocks that were cut. Bought and merged is not possible. But that would give a more accurate portrayal of the process.

    DD
    Apr 19, 2015. 10:44 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Taking A Financial Mulligan With Dividend Investing [View article]
    MM:

    You are my new follow. I would be happy to talk about the transition off forum or even offline as I went through it two years ago. I had a whole article written for SA and I think they denied it because it didn't fit nicely into any category, or it may be an instant blog post - I can't recall.

    It's good you have a plan. Here is one other huge piece of advice that a friend gave me when my divorce was new and raw: Scrimp for the first six months. Find new, cheap, free activities and see if there is anything you like. And don't get into a new relationship so quickly. As ready as you think you are, you are not and women know it. There is no reason to blow your money on something that won't be long term. It may be brutally honest but it is true. You'll thank me for it.

    DD
    Apr 14, 2015. 09:10 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bancolombia: Buy This Fast-Growing Bank At 5-Year Lows [View article]
    Ian:

    Thank you for the idea. As I was scouring the presentation, the latest earnings report, and their recommended dividend increase, here is what I put together:

    They are recommending to raise the dividend to 830 pesos, a 7% increase.

    It looks like they are trying to keep the dividend around a 40% payout ratio.

    The problem lies in the conversion ratio. Being a US based investor, the dividend totaled $1.62 in 2013; 1.53 in 2014, and because of the current exchange rate, it would be $1.25 for 2015.

    Since I look at dividend yield range, I see CIB undervalued at a 4% yield, or the share price gets to $31 based on $1.25 dividend for 2015. So for now, I will wait on the sidelines. If Mr. Market becomes truly irrational and dips to about $33, I might nibble knowing you have the two variables that could both project this higher. Similar to PM, the exchange rate currently makes this look worse than it is, but once the tides change, things will look beyond incredible.

    DD
    Mar 19, 2015. 09:49 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Visa: Can This Growth Stock Be A Dividend Champion? [View article]
    That's April 1, 2016.
    Mar 9, 2015. 09:40 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 5 Common Errors Of A Dividend Growth Forecast [View article]
    Kurtis:

    Really great article. Thanks so much. Although this focuses on dividend growth and the errors of investors ways, the most interesting stat you gave was the no bias results. The annualized returns were still over 10% without needing some deep thought. How many filters did you need for that screen? Three? It still intuitively tells me to fish only in this part of the pool than go for the NFLX and TSLA of the investing world.

    DD
    Mar 3, 2015. 02:33 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fastenal: A Wide-Moat High-Growth Play With A Dividend Approaching 3% [View article]
    Don't forget to then compare MSM, HDS, and possibly WSO to get the whole industry.
    Feb 20, 2015. 07:55 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Use GasLog Partners To Build Income [View article]
    Casey:

    It says on the one slide that even though GLOP is giving distributions like an MLP, it is being treated as a C-Corp, like Dynagas. Is that correct or am I misinterpreting?
    Feb 17, 2015. 02:10 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 'Income Growth' Vs. 'Dividend Growth' - The Re-Match [View article]
    SB:

    Thanks for the discussion. Two/three questions come to mind:

    1) Are these all monthly payers? I'll admit I'm too lazy to look up every investment that is listed.

    2) Would this be smarter with less investments? Like any ETF/CEF/mutual fund, some are more heavily weighted doing more of the leg work overall. You have a whole bunch that are less than 2% invested. Are they really helping you with that small a percentage to the whole pie?

    3) To piggy back on #2, would a near equal weight via income distributed be a more risk-diversifying approach? So 33 investments each contributing 3% to the income generated. (So yes, you would invest more money in A to get the same income output vs B).

    Just thinking out loud.

    DD
    Feb 6, 2015. 09:43 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Preferred Stock Dividend Growth [View article]
    Not any company can do preferreds. I know banks and REITS are allowed to, and maybe one or two other categories, but read up on Doug De Lu to get an idea of which companies can. It's a small group.

    DD
    Jan 27, 2015. 06:05 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Kinder Morgan: Earnings Replete With Boots, Spider Webs, Cats And Dogs And Silver Linings [View article]
    Charles:

    Thanks for that link. Living in Texas and going through a divorce, the key line in that article is "personally owned pipelines." Because they are personally owned and not a mega corporation, there is a personal goodwill that is not included in valuing assets strictly for divorce. So, the judge was saying that a VERY large percentage of the goodwill that was attached to the pipelines is because of the gentleman himself and not because of the business. Hence, for divorce purposes, we are valuing the combined estate at $248 million and the ex-wife cannot split the assets of the marriage on $1.86 billion.

    The man got his money's worth from that lawyer.

    DD
    Jan 23, 2015. 09:43 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
351 Comments
572 Likes